3.5 years or 1260 years

[Evang.Benincasa]

How can the reader be sure that Daniel is speaking about Islam?

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

How can the reader be sure that Daniel is speaking about Islam?

I'm not sure I follow your question, but I like the Joel's idea about how to look at Daniel.

For example, regarding Daniel 2, that dream was given to Nebuchadrezzar about things concerning kingdoms in the region after Babylonia. The gold statue was the Babylonian empire, then, the next powerful kingdom that reached the Middle East that ruled over Babylon was the Medo-Persian empire, then the Grecian empire. Then, the Parthian and the Sasanian kingdoms came, but they did not rule as far as the others, so they don’t qualify as the iron legs that “will break in pieces and crush all the others [Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian's territories].” The Sasanian did reach the Middle East but for only 20 years, and the Roman empire reached Babylon but only for one year. The Sasanians, Parthians, and Romans did not crush the territory of the Medo-Persian, or the Grecian empire. In fact the Sasanians and Parthians had a lot of the previous empires culturally. That's probably the interpretation of Daniel 7:12 when it says that while the fourth beast is destroyed completely, the other three beasts are allowed to live for some time after their dominion is taken "As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time". These four beasts came out at the same time in the vision, so it is just a comparison of the four human kingdoms character and ending. Not a timeline saying that they will be coexisting in time and ending at the same time (like Baxter's interpretation).

The next kingdom that did crush all other’s territory geographically, culturally, and religiously, and conquered Babylon and the Middle East for long periods was the Islamic Caliphates from 632 AD to 1922 AD. Therefore, the iron legs are more likely to be the Islamic Caliphates, and the toes an Islamic Caliphate revival attempt.

Curiously, the first Islamic Caliphates were very united, but they began to be divided among themselves like the Grecian empire started united and then divided, and fought among themselves for power and one part in particular, Epiphanes, attacking the people of God very wickedly.

If the Islamic Caliphates is the one, then that beast is probably already morphing into the 10 horns scenario that will rule with some powerful ruler "for one hour" out of the fragmented current state they are in.

Anyways, I hope Esaias didn't miss my previous post, and even this one two. I'll love to hear his thoughts. He probably went through this view as well in the past.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Anyways, I hope Esaias didn't miss my previous post, and even this one two. I'll love to hear his thoughts. He probably went through this view as well in the past.

Didn't miss it, just chewing on it for a bit before posting.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by coksiw

I'm not sure I follow your question, but I like the Joel's idea about how to look at Daniel.

For example, regarding Daniel 2, that dream was given to Nebuchadrezzar about things concerning kingdoms in the region after Babylonia. The gold statue was the Babylonian empire, then, the next powerful kingdom that reached the Middle East that ruled over Babylon was the Medo-Persian empire, then the Grecian empire. Then, the Parthian and the Sasanian kingdoms came, but they did not rule as far as the others, so they don’t qualify as the iron legs that “will break in pieces and crush all the others [Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian's territories].” The Sasanian did reach the Middle East but for only 20 years, and the Roman empire reached Babylon but only for one year. The Sasanians, Parthians, and Romans did not crush the territory of the Medo-Persian, or the Grecian empire. In fact the Sasanians and Parthians had a lot of the previous empires culturally. That's probably the interpretation of Daniel 7:12 when it says that while the fourth beast is destroyed completely, the other three beasts are allowed to live for some time after their dominion is taken "As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time". These four beasts came out at the same time in the vision, so it is just a comparison of the four human kingdoms character and ending. Not a timeline saying that they will be coexisting in time and ending at the same time (like Baxter's interpretation).

The next kingdom that did crush all other’s territory geographically, culturally, and religiously, and conquered Babylon and the Middle East for long periods was the Islamic Caliphates from 632 AD to 1922 AD. Therefore, the iron legs are more likely to be the Islamic Caliphates, and the toes an Islamic Caliphate revival attempt.

Curiously, the first Islamic Caliphates were very united, but they began to be divided among themselves like the Grecian empire started united and then divided, and fought among themselves for power and one part in particular, Epiphanes, attacking the people of God very wickedly.

If the Islamic Caliphates is the one, then that beast is probably already morphing into the 10 horns scenario that will rule with some powerful ruler "for one hour" out of the fragmented current state they are in.

Anyways, I hope Esaias didn't miss my previous post, and even this one two. I'll love to hear his thoughts. He probably went through this view as well in the past.

Do you mean Brother Irvin Baxter Jr?

My question is pretty clear. How does the reader know that the book of Daniel is speaking of an Islamic Caliphate?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Interesting thought.

What do you think about the 2300 in Daniel 8:13?

I delay in answering because quite honestly I haven't really studied Daniel 8 yet.

On a different, but similar note, I read (skimming) a couple of Joel Richardson books. Inspire on his possibility of the Islamic Caliphate being the center, not the Romans, I came with these interpretation ideas for Revelation 13 and 17 regarding the 7 headed beast (Joel says the seventh is the Islamic Caliphate and the eighth is the revival, which doesn't make sense to me)

The problem I have with the theory is that the Islamic Caliphate is already in consideration during the later trumpet judgments. I would have to look at the theory and study it out. But to suggest the fourth beast in Daniel 7, the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2, is the Islamic Caliphate, and thus to pretty much pass over the Roman Empire in prophetic silence seems incongruent with the rest of prophecy. Prophecy isn't about "the big events of world history" so much as about "the big events of history that affect Israel and God's Plans for His people". And the fourth beast, the Little Horn persecutions, etc which are described in Daniel 7 happen to fit the history of the Imperial and Papal Roman power.

But like I said, I would have to look at the theory to study it. Is there a link to any articles written by the author that explain his interpretation?

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I delay in answering because quite honestly I haven't really studied Daniel 8 yet.



The problem I have with the theory is that the Islamic Caliphate is already in consideration during the later trumpet judgments. I would have to look at the theory and study it out. But to suggest the fourth beast in Daniel 7, the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2, is the Islamic Caliphate, and thus to pretty much pass over the Roman Empire in prophetic silence seems incongruent with the rest of prophecy. Prophecy isn't about "the big events of world history" so much as about "the big events of history that affect Israel and God's Plans for His people". And the fourth beast, the Little Horn persecutions, etc which are described in Daniel 7 happen to fit the history of the Imperial and Papal Roman power.

But like I said, I would have to look at the theory to study it. Is there a link to any articles written by the author that explain his interpretation?

https://joelstrumpet.com/wp-content/...Antichrist.pdf

https://joelstrumpet.com/wp-content/...Richardson.pdf

I agree with his interpretation of Daniel statue and four beasts, but I disagree with Rev 13 and 17, which is what I posted here. He puts the Islamic Caliphates as the 7th king (short time=1290 years, seriously?), and its revival as 8th king (7 last years, futurist), but the criteria used skips important details. He interprets the healed head as the revival of the seventh.

I say the 7th is the Sasanian empire with its 20 years domination of the Middle East, and the 8th is the Islamic Caliphate starting from 632 to this day, which is the fourth beast of Daniel, and the legs+toes of the statue. I don't think Revelation says "it is of the seven" to mean "it is of the seventh", but that just comes from the seven kings, and the text itself tells you why: because the 8th king beast is like a leopard (Grecian empire, military success, crushing character).

Another interesting idea he has is the Babylon harlot. He believes is a moving concept and actual city, that represents the actual consumer, luxury, religious center city of the crushing empire of the time. And that it is the city that aligns with the current beast to impose its religion and persecute the saints through history, as it moves from empire to empire. So, it was Rome, but now would be the Mecca in Saudi Arabia.

The skipping of Rome in Daniel has to do with what he says it is where the prophecy centers on. In the case of Daniel, the statue is centered on Babylon, and the four beasts vision would be just more details about the statue. But Daniel's prophecies later transition toward the Middle East as the focus. For Revelation, it is Asia Minor ("John to the seven churches which are in Asia") but in relation to Middle East as well.

My understanding is that the commonality of the Middle East has to do with the fact that it is the physical promise land, but also an indicator God uses of the prophetic times for the entire world.

Anyway, interesting ideas.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Do you mean Brother Irvin Baxter Jr?

My question is pretty clear. How does the reader know that the book of Daniel is speaking of an Islamic Caliphate?

Sorry EB, your question is clear but doesn't make sense to me. I was expecting you to politely rephrase it or something.

If you mean the Daniel original readers in Babylon, obviously they don't know, because for them was going to be a future event. But you already know this, so that's why it didn't make sense to me you were asking this.

If you mean future readers, then according to the prophecy criteria I explained in my two posts, which then I had already answered the question, which again, it didn't make sense to me you were asking the question because you already read my posts?

If you can please politely rephrase you question with more details I may be able to share my thoughts.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by coksiw

https://joelstrumpet.com/wp-content/...Antichrist.pdf

https://joelstrumpet.com/wp-content/...Richardson.pdf

I agree with his interpretation of Daniel statue and four beasts, but I disagree with Rev 13 and 17, which is what I posted here. He puts the Islamic Caliphates as the 7th king (short time=1290 years, seriously?), and its revival as 8th king (7 last years, futurist), but the criteria used skips important details. He interprets the healed head as the revival of the seventh.

I say the 7th is the Sasanian empire with its 20 years domination of the Middle East, and the 8th is the Islamic Caliphate starting from 632 to this day, which is the fourth beast of Daniel, and the legs+toes of the statue. I don't think Revelation says "it is of the seven" to mean "it is of the seventh", but that just comes from the seven kings, and the text itself tells you why: because the 8th king beast is like a leopard (Grecian empire, military success, crushing character).

Another interesting idea he has is the Babylon harlot. He believes is a moving concept and actual city, that represents the actual consumer, luxury, religious center city of the crushing empire of the time. And that it is the city that aligns with the current beast to impose its religion and persecute the saints through history, as it moves from empire to empire. So, it was Rome, but now would be the Mecca in Saudi Arabia.

The skipping of Rome in Daniel has to do with what he says it is where the prophecy centers on. In the case of Daniel, the statue is centered on Babylon, and the four beasts vision would be just more details about the statue. But Daniel's prophecies later transition toward the Middle East as the focus. For Revelation, it is Asia Minor ("John to the seven churches which are in Asia") but in relation to Middle East as well.

My understanding is that the commonality of the Middle East has to do with the fact that it is the physical promise land, but also an indicator God uses of the prophetic times for the entire world.



Anyway, interesting ideas.

Isn't the prophecy in Daniel have to do with Israel?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Sorry EB, your question is clear but doesn't make sense to me. I was expecting you to politely rephrase it or something.

I'm sorry as well.

I didn't know I was being impolite?

I guess I can't see a Islamic Caliphate in Daniel.

[coksiw]

I was reading this the other day, and I remembered now. The people of God were not only in the Roman empire. They were spread out over other empires too.

Here the Christians in the territory of the Sasanian empire:

Shapur II pursued a harsh religious policy. Under his reign, the collection of the Avesta, the sacred texts of Zoroastrianism, was completed, heresy and apostasy were punished, and Christians were persecuted. The latter was a reaction against the Christianization of the Roman Empire by Constantine the Great. Shapur II, like Shapur I, was amicable towards Jews, who lived in relative freedom and gained many advantages during his reign.

Bahram V's son Yazdegerd II (438–457) was in some ways a moderate ruler, but, in contrast to Yazdegerd I, he practised a harsh policy towards minority religions, particularly Christianity

The Sasanian empire persecuted Christians as well, on and off, during its dominion. Probably everywhere Christians went, were persecuted. We know about Roman persecution the most because of our Western history records, and just culture.

The same with the Islamic Caliphates nations, persecutions, on and off, while the Pope was in power too.

I think the idea that the prophetic focuses on the people of God who are dispersed across empires, but also on the promise land on the Middle East and what happens there makes the most sense.


EB,
[Daniel 2:29, 39 NKJV] 29 "As for you, O king, thoughts came [to] your [mind while] on your bed, [about] what would come to pass after this; and He who reveals secrets has made known to you what will be. ... 39 "But after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to yours; then another, a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth.

I think the prophecy is indeed about the fate of Babylon's dominion and its relationship with the promise land.