The Exiled Prophet, Part 8: The Four Beasts (Daniel 7)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 жов 2024
- Continuing our Bible study series on the exiled prophet, Daniel, we take a look at chapter seven. In this chapter, Daniel has a vision about four beasts, one with many horns. The question becomes, what do these beasts and horns represent and has this vision of Daniel’s come to pass yet?
www.119ministr...
Follow the above link to partner with 119 Ministries and support ongoing free teaching production.
If you would like to discuss this video with us, we invite you to join the discussion on the teaching page found on our website or reach us privately through the Contact Us form on our website: 119ministries.c...
Thank you so much for your continued and prayerful support. May YHWH bless you and keep you.
Shalom
Thank you for this teaching ~
Seeing Klaus Schwab/WEF & Biden tripping over the stairs when you mentioned of kingdoms that will eventually be taken over just put a smile on my face. Great teaching as always.
I'm so glad to see this series fired up again! What a blessing!
..I am interested in the "..a season and time.", mentioned in Da.7:12.
There was no comment made on it like there were of Da.7:25.
Can you advise for 'understandings' sake?
I could be wrong, but I think that means "appointed time" the root of the word season in that verse means appointed. The Spanish translation RVG says "hasta cierto tiempo"
Great insights; thank you.
Pls do a teaching on the rapture a false doctrine. many think that taken is the righteous & left is the wicked. Many think that the phrase he will come like a thief in the night is the disappearance of saint but the sudden destruction of the wicked. also there is no rapture because the dead will rise first not the saint will be taken. i believed in the rapture only to find out it is false.
good for you!!!
who would like all of God's warriors to be unprepared because they THINK they'll be gone? none other than satan, himself
I am wondering if we are being lead astray on which empire to focus on.
Yes, Rome is prominent in scripture, but we must not forget about the understated family fued raging between Abraham's seed. Ishmael hated Issac, and Essau hated Jacob. Ishmael is the father of the Islamic faith, which is and has been fighting Israel for generations. The Ottoman Empire was ruling over Jerusalem longer than Rome, and the remnant (which was officially divided into 4 units in 1922) is still causing issues for Jerusalem today.
Keep an eye on Turkey and Iran
Great to see this part in the series finally come into action!
Great cross-referencing guys!
This is the proof of Yeshua ben Miriam as The-Messiah of Israel because Daniel, Isaiah and Jeremiah all help to explain the history of the world for about the past 2000 years and parts of it go something like this:
In the case of the visions which John received, 7 kings are not the 7 major countries of Western Europe in the instance of the later sequence, surely this is the mention of the hills of Rome. Read:
“Matthew Poole's Commentary - Rev.17:10
And there are seven kings; the seven heads do not only signify seven hills or mountains, but also seven kings, that is, according to the best interpretation I meet with, seven forms of government which ruled Rome; the term, kings, in Scripture, signifying rulers, whether the government was in single persons, or more, as Deuteronomy 33:5. Rome was governed.....
Five are fallen; five of these were fallen, extinguished before John’s time, viz. the government by kings, consuls, tribunes, decemvirs, dictators.
And one is; the government by pagan emperors was at that time in being.
And the other is not yet come; the government by Christian emperors was not yet in being.
And when he cometh, he must continue a short space; and when it came, it held but a little time before the bishops of Rome wrested the government of Italy out of their hands. This to me seemeth the most probable interpretation of this difficult text.”
His identification of seven forms of government, through an unknown source, is not at all contrary to the ancient usage of the noun, king (take Rashi for instance in the prior example), and Revelation uses kings elsewhere to signify the governance of (European) nations over a period of decades, liken to one hour, or more (Rev.12:3, 13:1, 17:3, 7, 12) Consequently I have examined Poole's brief thesis based upon different systems of governance and expanded upon it:
1. The Roman Monarchs were kings upon the founding, c. 753 BCE, elected by men of the Roman Senate until Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, 509 BCE.
2. The dual, elected consuls ruled much of the time until 27 BCE and the end of the Roman Republic. In the event of war or some other major crisis, a dictator could be appointed for a period not exceeding six months.
3. The Decemviri are thought to have originated during the middle of the era of the kings but in 451-450 BCE, the First and Second Decemvirate, incorporating the two consuls, were commissioned on agreement by the Patricians and Plebians of Rome, settling a decade of conflict. They served alternate days, thus one presided after another within their period.
“...That ten of the most conspicuous of the Fathers should be chosen. That they ruled over the whole Republic for a year from the day of the election with the power that the Consuls had, and first the Kings. And that as long as the Decemvirs ruled they ceased from any other magistracy. That they propose the most useful laws to the Republic, choosing among the best ones brought back from Greece, and among the customs of the Fatherland. That the laws written by the Decemvirs, approved by the Senate, and ratified by the People, would be valid for the whole future...”
- Dionysius, Roman Antiquities, Book X, 55.
4. Likewise the consular tribunes (also called military tribunes with consular power) of varying size interspersed the middle period of the rulers known as consuls whilst the 'Conflict of the Orders' consistently reignited. Exact dates are not agreed upon as the two sparse ancient accounts differ.
5. Dictators were appointees, an extraordinary magistrate, an office established post-monarchy, and they had to work within the constraints of the senate and in harmony with other magistrates. The office formally ceased after the assassination of Julius Caesar.
The First Triumvirate is the name usually used to refer to the unofficial political alliance of Gaius Julius Caesar, Marcus Licinius Crassus, and Gneo Pompeo Magno, 60 BCE. Unlike the Second Triumvirate, the First Triumvirate was characterized by a strictly private agreement and had no official value; his power in the Roman state derived from the personal influence of the Triumvirs in the politics of the Republic and was a guarded secret for a time as part of the political project of the Triumvirs themselves.
The death of Caesar, 44 BCE, opened a phase of serious instability within the Roman state. The reasons for which the conspiracy against Caesar was hatched are to be found in the quasi-monarchical powers that he had accumulated after the victory over Pompey. The killers were moved by an atavistic aversion to any form of personal and absolute power, in the name of republican traditions and freedoms.
The Second Triumvirate is the name given to the alliance stipulated on Nov.26, 43 BCE, between Octavian Augustus, Marco Antonio, and Marco Emilio Lepido. This alliance lasted until 33 BCE, for ten years, but was not renewed. Unlike the First Triumvirate, which was only a private arrangement, the Second Triumvirate was an official, albeit extra-constitutional, organisation that received the imperium maius.
6. The Roman Empire ran from 27 BCE until Constantine I (306-337 CE), all these Emperors were pagans.
Caesar Augustus, also known as Octavian, began reigning on 16 January, 27 BCE, and was succeeded by Tiberius (Luke 3:1). This 1st Century period was marked by outstandingly twisted leadership, Emperors Caligula and Nero, with Domitian, younger brother to Titus, being assassinated, 18 September, 96 CE. There were 11 Roman Emperors to this point in the 1st Century. The Year of the Four Emperors (68-69 CE) does not seem to add up as being a viable solution for the riddle of the 7 kings but this period may possibly be construed as an era within itself. Rashi read the 10 horns as Roman kings before Vespasian, he that proved the ruin of the Herodian Temple and the end of sacrifices, in fact there were but 8 Emperors from Octavian (Dan.7:7, 9:26-27).
The culmination of the Pax Romana era, a time of relative peace, commencing 27 BCE, was the Nerva-Antonine dynasty, comprising 7 Roman Emperors, but two, 5th and 6th, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, served jointly, and the span of years was 96-192 CE. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was born, 26 April, 121 CE, which is late relative to John's expected age, and the text of Revelation seems to describe his period of rule after the death of the 5th, Lucius Aurelius Verus, 169 CE, which is far too late. The 'Five Good Emperors', Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius, is a term coined by Niccolò Machiavelli (The Discourses on Livy, 1531).
7. Emperors that were non-pagan commenced with the three brothers, Constantine II and Constans (Christians), and Constantius II (Arian-Netzerim), then continued into the Byzantine Empire, ending with Constantine XI Dragases Palaiologos (Eastern Orthodox) on 29 May 1453, battling the Ottoman Sultan, Mehmed II, after three ill omens during the final week of siege.
8. The Western Roman Empire collapsed around 476 CE but the Roman papacy and its powerful influence endured, unbroken, until Napoleon's French Republican troops invaded the Italian peninsular in 1796, but its wound was healed afterwards (Rev.13:3). Pope Pius VI was imprisoned by French troops and escorted to Siena on 20 Feb. 1798, he died in Valence, France, 29 August 1799. The power of the Vatican was again most prominent in the Reagan era in Pope John Paul II.
And the beast which was, and is not, is also himself an eighth, and is of the seven, and goes into destruction. - Rev.17:11, Berean Literal Bible.
Some while back I have seen a documentary showing a German building where stone preserves the art stemming from Lutheran doctrines which developed early on regarding the verifiable historic aspects of Revelation and Rome/Edom, one matter the Jews do not dispute within the Tanakh (Dan.7:1-3, 7-8, 19-24).
I don’t think at this time anyone knows for sure the correct interpretation of the beasts. This explanation is plausible but I have heard other explanations that seem more likely. As of now I think Irvin Baxter has the best explanation for the beasts. However I’ll admit they could all be wrong.
Who was the prince!! That prince was the European Romans Alexander the Great, King Herod and Roman Europeans conquered Jerusalem,Slave the Israelites,Hung Jesus on a tree and make war with Christ Seed!! There goes the beast and Red dragon Daniel and John talked about..
i love the way these guys TEACH vs PREACH!!!
Gnostic heresies; rapture/Dispensationalism, Continuationism and credobaptist.
all traditions of men...all false!
The Caliphate will rise again and is the forth Beast - Ottoman Empire
D Daniel's prophecy only covers the millennial Kingdom. During the millennial Kingdom there were still beat deaths and sacrifices in the the forever Kingdom will be after this
Sorry, but the prophecies in the book of Daniel don't include the Roman Empire at all. Revalation 17, 8 teils us, that the beast with the seven heads and the ten horns already was, but is not now (in the perspective of John), and will arise out of the abbyss and go into destruction. The book of Daniel doesn't tell anything about the Roman Empire at all. It tells us about the four kingdoms, in which the the Empire of Alexander the Great was devided into four diadochean kingdoms and that out of one of these four comes a little horn, known as Antiochus IV. Epiphany (see Daniel chapter 8 and 11). Interpretating the fourth beast in Daniel 7 on the Roman Empire is legit a false teaching. Yes, it is false teaching, no matters, what you are actually thinking. It is false teaching to interpretate the book of Daniel on the Roman Empire. The book of Daniel doesn't speak of the Roman Empire at all. Prove that. Ask the Lord about that. Don't rely on men's teaching on that issue. Ask the Lord about the book of Daniel. If you do that well, you will see and understand, there is no Roman empire in the book of Daniel at all. The antichristian empire in the end of times is a seleucid syrian empire, according to Antiochus IV. Epiphany. That's what the book of Daniel teaches us. Open your eyes and stop interpretating as men do. Start interpretating god's words, as god's words do. You will see and understand!!! 🙏🙏🙏🙏
I made videos about the book of Daniel on my own, but they are all in german language, because I am German. But if it's possible for anyone of your community to understand german, please listen to my videos and try to explain in english. I can't do that right now, because that's too much for the comment section.^^
I did already videos about the 70 weeks in Daniel chapter 9 and the ram and the goat in chapter 8. Actually I'm preparing a video about the more than 20 kings in the chapter 11 in the book of Daniel. I know, that seems polemic, when I say, that the interpretations of the book of Daniel are not about the Roman Empire. But it is the truth.
You only mentioned 3 kingdoms. What's the 4th kingdom/power in your interpretation?
Well I wish I could listen to them, only problem is the absence of the limitations of your understanding and assumptions you have made.