|
Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,224
Members1,326
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188065
12/15/18 12:47 PM
12/15/18 12:47 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,245
Florida, USA
|
|
Now here is a really good study that really makes sense with a breakdown of Daniel 11 on what the verses give us.
Daniel 11:1 King James Version (KJV)
"1 Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him."
'The language of Daniel 11-12 is not symbolic in the same way that it is in chapters 2, 7 and 8. There are no images, beasts, or horns. Just the same, its language is cryptic, almost like a code. Each sentence condenses quantities of information, and many metaphors are employed.
These qualities have led to a variety of interpretations. There are, however, two very useful guidelines that all interpretations must follow to be acceptable:
1. This vision begins with a reference to King Cyrus and ends with God’s people delivered. So just like the other prophecies of Daniel, this one does not focus in on a narrow span of history but covers a long time span from the prophet’s day to the end of the world. This also means there should be some parallels that can be identified between this vision and the previous ones.
2. Within the text are several specific phrases that can be accurately pinned to certain historical events or time periods.
Last edited by Rick H; 12/15/18 12:48 PM.
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188072
12/15/18 07:52 PM
12/15/18 07:52 PM
|
SDA
Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
Now here is a really good study that really makes sense with a breakdown of Daniel 11 on what the verses give us. Why do you think Uriah Smith titles the chapter in Daniel and Revelation on Daniel 11 as he does? It is literal, not spiritual. And the king of the north always occupied the same territory, which is where? Fill in the blank: _________________ What was this question call the Eastern Question? Fill in the blank: _________________
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188076
12/16/18 12:18 AM
12/16/18 12:18 AM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,245
Florida, USA
|
|
Daniel 11:2 King James Version (KJV)
"2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia."
The “fourth” king of Persia after Cyrus was Xerxes (Greek name for Ahasuerus), the husband of Queen Esther, who ruled at the height of Persian power and wealth. He raised a huge army with contingents from forty different nations and attacked Greece around 480 BC.
The Persian invasion was eventually repelled, but it roused a burning desire on the part of the independent city states of Greece to unite and average themselves on the Persians. There is much more detail on the rulers and activities of this kingdom than we have seen in previous visions.
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188077
12/16/18 12:19 AM
12/16/18 12:19 AM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,245
Florida, USA
|
|
Daniel 11:3-4 King James Version (KJV)
"3 And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will.4 And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; and not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others beside those."
These two verses deal with Alexander’s conquests and the subsequent four divisions of his kingdom. This is the end of the obvious and easy sections of this prophecy.
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188078
12/16/18 12:19 AM
12/16/18 12:19 AM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,245
Florida, USA
|
|
Now comes Daniel 11:5-15
These verses deal with the intricate details of the rulers and activities of the divided kingdom of Greece. Ultimately two of these divisions came to dominate to such an extent that the Bible record accurately portrays them under the titles of “The King of the North,” and “The King of the South.”
The enemies of Israel, such as Babylon and Egypt, always attacked from the north and the south. Thus “The King of the North” and “The King of the South” came to symbolize the adversaries of God’s people. This entire vision depicts these enemies as warring powers whose battles adversely affect God’s people
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188079
12/16/18 12:19 AM
12/16/18 12:19 AM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,245
Florida, USA
|
|
Daniel 11:16-20 King James Version (KJV)
"16 But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed.
17 He shall also set his face to enter with the strength of his whole kingdom, and upright ones with him; thus shall he do: and he shall give him the daughter of women, corrupting her: but she shall not stand on his side, neither be for him.
18 After this shall he turn his face unto the isles, and shall take many: but a prince for his own behalf shall cause the reproach offered by him to cease; without his own reproach he shall cause it to turn upon him.
19 Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land: but he shall stumble and fall, and not be found.
20 Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle."
This section applies to the Pagan Roman Empire; it is the “King of the North” that “none shall stand before.” In 63 BC the Roman General Pompey interceded in a Jewish civil war and declared Judea a Roman protectorate.
Verses 17-19 are generally applied to Julius Caesar, ending with his assassination. Caesar Augustus, who, at the time of Christ’s birth, decreed that “the entire world should be taxed” (Luke 2:1), is pointed out in verse 20
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188080
12/16/18 12:21 AM
12/16/18 12:21 AM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,245
Florida, USA
|
|
Daniel 11:21-24 King James Version (KJV)
"21 And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries.
22 And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.
23 And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.
24 He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time."
Here is where it starts to get harder, but if you look at the other prophecies in Daniel, the power that arises after Pagan Rome is the Papacy. So we go over how this comes to bear.." prophecy here shifts over to Papal Rome, with verse 22 referring to the papacy setting itself up against Christ, corresponding to “magnified himself even to the prince of the host” in Daniel 8:11."
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188081
12/16/18 12:22 AM
12/16/18 12:22 AM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,245
Florida, USA
|
|
Daniel 11:25-30 King James Version (KJV)
"25 And he shall stir up his power and his courage against the king of the south with a great army; and the king of the south shall be stirred up to battle with a very great and mighty army; but he shall not stand: for they shall forecast devices against him.
26 Yea, they that feed of the portion of his meat shall destroy him, and his army shall overflow: and many shall fall down slain.
27 And both of these kings' hearts shall be to do mischief, and they shall speak lies at one table; but it shall not prosper: for yet the end shall be at the time appointed.
28 Then shall he return into his land with great riches; and his heart shall be against the holy covenant; and he shall do exploits, and return to his own land.
29 At the time appointed he shall return, and come toward the south; but it shall not be as the former, or as the latter.
30 For the ships of Chittim shall come against him: therefore he shall be grieved, and return, and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant."
It gets harder with many ideas, but if we are looking at papal power then it makes sense. So the if we check history, "this section refers to the crusades which Papal Rome as king of the north launched to reclaim the Holy Land from the Muslims, “the King of the South,” around AD 1095-1272."
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188082
12/16/18 12:23 AM
12/16/18 12:23 AM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,245
Florida, USA
|
|
Daniel 11:31-35 King James Version (KJV)
"31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
32 And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits.
33 And they that understand among the people shall instruct many: yet they shall fall by the sword, and by flame, by captivity, and by spoil, many days.
34 Now when they shall fall, they shall be holpen with a little help: but many shall cleave to them with flatteries.
35 And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed."
Now we come to the corruption of this power. "The abomination that maketh desolate” refers here to the Church of Rome and points to the Reformation period and the persecution of “heretics” by the Roman Catholic Papacy."
|
|
|
Re: The King of the North
[Re: Rick H]
#188087
12/16/18 01:19 AM
12/16/18 01:19 AM
|
SDA
Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
Uriah Smith:
Daniel 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
"They shall pollute the sanctuary of strength," or Rome. If this applies to the barbarians, it was literally fulfilled; for Rome was sacked by the Goths and Vandals, and the imperial power of the West ceased through the conquest of Rome by Odoacer. Or if it refers to those rulers of the empire who were working in behalf of the papacy against the pagan and all other opposing religions, it would signify the removal of the seat of empire from Rome to Constantinople, which contributed its measure of influence to the downfall of Rome. The passage would then be parallel to Daniel 8:11 and Revelation 13:2.
Papacy Takes Away "the Daily."--It was shown in comments on Daniel 8:13, that "sacrifice" is a word erroneously supplied. It should be "desolation." The expression denotes a desolating power, of which the abomination of desolation is but the counterpart, and to which it succeeds in point of time. It seems clear therefore that the "daily" desolation was paganism, and the "abomination of desolation" is the papacy. But it may be asked, How can this be the papacy since Christ spoke of it in connection with the destruction of Jerusalem? The answer is, Christ evidently referred to Daniel 9, which predicts the destruction of Jerusalem, and not to this verse in Daniel 11, which does not refer to that event. In the ninth chapter, Daniel speaks of desolations and abominations in the plural. More than one abomination, therefore, treads down the church; that is, as far as the church is concerned, both paganism and the papacy are abominations. But as distinguished from each other, the language is restricted. One is the "daily" desolation, and the other is pre-eminently the transgression of "abomination" of desolation.
How was the "daily," or paganism, taken away? As this is spoken of in connection with the placing or setting up of the abomination of desolation, or the papacy, it must denote, not merely the nominal change of the religion of the empire from paganism to Christianity, as on the so-called conversion of Constantine, but to such an eradication of paganism from all the elements of the empire that the way would be entirely open for the papal abomination to arise and assert its arrogant claims. Such a revolution as this was accomplished, but not for nearly two hundred years after the death of Constantine.
As we approach the year A.D. 508, we behold a mighty crisis ripening between Catholicism and the pagan influences still existing in the empire. Up to the time of the conversion of Clovis, king of France, in A.D. 496, the French and other nations of Western Rome were pagan; but following that event, the efforts to convert idolaters to Romanism were crowned with great success. The conversion of Clovis is said to have been the occasion of bestowing upon the French monarch the titles "Most Christian Majesty" and "Eldest Son of the Church." Between that time and A.D. 508, by alliances, capitulations, and conquests, the Arborici, the Roman garrisons in the West, Brittany, the Burgundians, and the Visigoths, were brought into subjects.
From the time when these successes were fully accomplished, in A.D. 508, the papacy was triumphant so far as paganism was concerned; for though the latter doubtless retarded the progress of the Catholic faith, yet it had not the power, if it had the disposition, to suppress the faith, and hinder the encroachments of the Roman pontiff. When the prominent powers of Europe gave up their attachment to paganism, it was only to perpetuate its abominations in another form; for Christianity as exhibited in the RomanCatholic Church was, and is, only paganism baptized.
The status of the see of Rome was also peculiar at this time. In 498, Symmachus ascended the pontifical throne as a recent convert from paganism. He found his way to the papal chair by striving with his competitor even unto blood. He received adulation as the successor of St. Peter, and struck the keynote of papal assumption by presuming to excommunicate the Emperor Anastasius. [25] The most servile flatterers of the pope now began to maintain that he was constituted judge in the place of God, and that he was the vicegerent of the Most High.
Such was the direction in which events were tending in the West. In what state were affairs at the same time in the East? A strong papal party now existed in all parts of the empire. The adherents of this cause in Constantinople, encouraged by the success of their brethren in the West, deemed it safe to begin open hostilities in behalf of their master at Rome.
Let it be marked that soon after the year 508, paganism had so far declined, and Catholicism had so far relatively increased in strength, that the Catholic Church for the first time was able to wage a successful war against both the civil authority of the empire and the church of the East, which had for the most part embraced the Monophysite doctrine, which Rome counted heresy. Partisan zeal culminated in a whirlwind of fanaticism and civil war, which swept in fire and blood through Constantinople. That such a war took place a few years later will be seen in the following quotation from Gibbon in his account of events under the years 508-518:
"The statues of the emperor were broken, and his person was concealed in a suburb, till, at the end of three days, he dared to implore the mercy of his subjects. Without his diadem, and in the posture of a suppliant, Anastasius appeared on the throne of the circus. The Catholics, before his face, rehearsed their genuine Trisagion; they exulted in the offer, which he proclaimed by the voice of a herald, of abdicating the purple; they listened to the admonition, that since all could not reign, they should previously agree in the choice of a sovereign; and they accepted the blood of two unpopular ministers, whom their master, without hesitation, condemned to the lions. These furious but transient seditions were encouraged by the success of Vitalian, who, with an army of Huns and Bulgarians, for the most part idolaters, declared himself the champion of the Catholic faith. In this pious rebellion he depopulated Thrace, besieged Constantinople, exterminated sixty-five thousand of his fellow Christians, till he obtained the recall of the bishops, the satisfaction of the pope, and the establishment of the Council of Chalcedon, an orthodox treaty, reluctantly signed by the dying Anastasius, and more faithfully performed by the uncle of Justinian. And such was the event of the first of the religious wars which have been waged in the name, and by the disciples, of the God of Peace." [26]
We think it clear that the daily was taken away by A.D. 508. This was preparatory to the setting up, or establishment, of the papacy, which was a separate and subsequent event. Of this the prophetic narrative now leads us to speak.
Papacy Sets Up an Abomination.--"They shall place the abomination that maketh desolate." Having shown quite fully what we think constitutes the taking away of the daily, or paganism, we now inquire, When was the abomination that maketh desolate, or the papacy, placed, or set up? The little horn that had eyes like the eyes of man was not slow to see when the way was open for his advancement and elevation. from the year 508 his progress toward universal supremacy was without a parallel.
When Justinian was about to begin the Vandal war in A.D. 533, an enterprise of no small magnitude and difficulty, he wished to secure the influence of the bishop of Rome, who had then attained a position in which his opinion had great weight throughout a large part of Christendom. Justinian therefore took it upon himself to decide the contest which had long existed between the sees of Rome and Constantinople as to which should have the precedence, by giving the preference to Rome in an official letter to the pope, declaring in the fullest and most unequivocal terms that the bishop of that city should be chief of the whole ecclesiastical body of the empire.
Justinian's letter reads: "Justinian, victor, pious, fortunate, famous, triumphant, ever Augustus, to John, the most holy Archbishop and Patriarch of the noble city of Rome. Paying honor to the Apostolic See and to Your Holiness, as always has been and is our desire, and honoring your blessedness as a father, we hasten to bring to the knowledge of Your Holiness all that pertains to the condition of the churches, since it has always been our great aim to safeguard the unity of your Apostolic See and the position of the holy churches of God which now prevails and abides securely without any disturbing trouble. Therefore we have been sedulous to subject and unite all the priests of the Orient throughout its whole extent to the see of Your Holiness. Whatever questions happen to be mooted at present, we have thought necessary to be brought to Your Holiness's knowledge, however clear and unquestionable they may be, and though firmly held and taught by all the clergy in accordance with the doctrine of your Apostolic See; for we do not suffer that anything which is mooted, however clear and unquestionable, pertaining to the state of the churches, should fail to be made known to Your Holiness, as being the head of the churches. For, as we have said before, we are zealous for the increase of the honor and authority of your see in all respects." [27]
"The emperor's letter must have been sent before the 25th of March, 533. For, in his letter of that date to Epiphanius he speaks of its having been already dispatched, and repeats his decision that all affairs touching the church shall be referred to the pope, 'head of all bishops, and the true and effective corrector of heretics.' " [28]
"In the same month of the following year, 534, the pope returned an answer repeating the language of the emperor, applauding his homage to the see, and adopting the titles of the imperial mandate. He observes that, among the virtues of Justinian, 'one shines as a star, his reverence for the Apostolic chair, to which he has subjected and united all the churches, it being truly the Head of all; as was testified by the rules of the Fathers, the laws of the Princes, and the declarations of the Emperor's piety.'
"The authenticity of the title receives unanswerable proof from the edicts in the 'Novellae' of the Justinian code. The preamble of the 9th states that 'as the elder Rome was the founder of the laws; so was it not to be questioned that in her was the supremacy of the pontificate.' The 131st, On the ecclesiastical titles and privileges, chapter ii, states: 'We therefore decree that the most holy Pope of the elder Rome is the first of all the priesthood, and that the most blessed Archbishop of Constantinople, the new Rome, shall hold the second rank after the holy Apostolic chair of the elder Rome.' " [29]
Toward the close of the sixth century, John of Constantinople denied the Roman supremacy, and assumed for himself the title of universal bishop; whereupon Gregory the Great, indignant at the usurpation, denounced John and declared, without being aware of the truth of his statement, that he who would assume the title of universal bishop was the Antichrist. In 606, Phocas suppressed the claim of the bishop of Constantinople, and vindicated that of the bishop of Rome. But Phocas was not the founder of papal supremacy. "That Phocas repressed the claim of the bishop of Constantinople is beyond a doubt. But the highest authorities among the civilians
and annalists of Rome spurn the idea that Phocas was the founder of the supremacy of Rome; they ascend to Justinian as the only legitimate source, and rightly date the title from the memorable year 533." [30]
George Croly makes this further statement: "On reference to Baronius, the established authority among the Roman Catholic annalists, I found Justinian's grant of supremacy to the pope formally fixed to that period. . . . The entire transaction was of the most authentic and regular kind, and suitable to the importance of the transfer." [31]
Such were the circumstances attending the decree of Justinian. But the provisions of this decree would not at once be carried into effect; for Rome and Italy were held by the Ostrogoths, who were Arians in faith, and strongly opposed to the religion of Justinian and the pope. It was therefore evident that the Ostrogoths must be rooted out of Rome before the pope could exercise the power with which he had been clothed. To accomplish this object, the Italian was began in 534. The management of the campaign was entrusted to Belisarius. On his approach toward Rome, several cities forsook Vitiges, their Gothic and heretical sovereign, and joined the armies of the Catholic emperor. The Goths, deciding to delay offensive operations until spring, allowed Belisarius to enter Rome without opposition. The deputies of the pope and the clergy, of the senate and the people, invited the lieutenant of Justinian to accept their voluntary allegiance.
Belisarius entered Rome on December 10, 536. But this was not an end of the struggle, for the Goths rallied their forces and resolved to dispute his possession of the city by a regular siege, which they began in March, 537. Belisarius feared despair and treachery on the part of the people. Several senators, and Pope Silverius, on proof or suspicion of treason, were sent into exile. The emperor commanded the clergy to elect a new bishop. After solemnly invoking the Holy Ghost they elected the deacon Vigilius, who, by a bribe of two hundred pounds of gold, had purchased the honor. [32]
The whole nation of the Ostrogoths had been assembled for the siege of Rome, but success did not attend their efforts. Their hosts melted away in frequent and bloody combats under the city walls, and the year and nine days during which the siege lasted, witnessed almost the entire destruction of the nation. In the month of March, 538, dangers beginning to threaten them from other quarters, they raised the siege, burned their tents, and retired in tumult and confusion from the city, with numbers scarcely sufficient to preserve their existence as a nation or their identity as a people.
Thus the Gothic horn, the last of the three, was plucked up before the little horn of Daniel 7. Nothing now stood in the way of the pope to prevent his exercising the power conferred upon him by Justinian five years before. The saints, times, and laws were now in his hands, not in purpose only, but in fact. This must therefore be taken as the year when this abomination was placed, or set up, and as the point from which to date the beginning of the prophetic period of 1260 years of papal supremacy.
[25] See Louis E. Dupin, A New History of Ecclesiastical Writers, Vol. V, pp. 1-3, "Pope Symmachus."
[26] Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol. IV, chap. 47, p. 526.
[27] Codex Justiniani, lib. 1, Titus 1; translation as given by R. F. Littledale The Petrine Claims, p. 293.
[28] George Croly, The Apocalypse of St. John, p. 170.
[29] Ibid., pp. 170, 171.
[30] Ibid., pp. 172, 173.
[31] Ibid., pp. 12, 13.
[32] Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Vol. IV, chap. 41, pp. 168, 169.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
