Monday, December 29, 2008
"People are touched by events which have their roots far across the world. Whether it is the global economy or violence in a distant land, the effects can be keenly felt at home.
"Once again, many of our service men and women are serving on operations in common cause to bring peace and security to troubled places.
"In this 90th year since the end of the First World War, the last survivors recently commemorated the service and enormous sacrifice of their own generation.
"Their successors in theatres such as Iraq and Afghanistan are still to be found in harm's way in the service of others. For their loved ones, the worry will never cease until they are safely home.
"In such times as these we can all learn something from the past. We might begin to see things in a new perspective. And certainly, we begin to ask ourselves where it is that we can find lasting happiness.
"Over the years those who have seemed to me to be the most happy, contented and fulfilled have always been the people who have lived the most outgoing and unselfish lives; the kind of people who are generous with their talents or their time.
"There are those who use their prosperity or good fortune for the benefit of others whether they number among the great philanthropists or are people who, with whatever they have, simply have a desire to help those less fortunate than themselves.
"What they offer comes in the form of what can easily be recognised as service to the nation or service to the wider community.
"As often as not however, their unselfishness is a simply taken-for-granted part of the life of their family or neighbourhood.
"They tend to have some sense that life itself is full of blessings, and is a precious gift for which we should be thankful.
"When life seems hard the courageous do not lie down and accept defeat; instead they are all the more determined to struggle for a better future.
"I think we have a huge amount to learn from individuals such as these. And what I believe many of us share with them is a source of strength and peace of mind in our families and friends.
"Indeed, Prince Philip and I can reflect on the blessing, comfort and support we have gained from our own family in this special year for our son, the Prince of Wales. Sixty years ago, he was baptised here in the Music Room at Buckingham Palace. As parents and grandparents, we feel great pride in seeing our family make their own unique contributions to society.
"Through his charities, the Prince of Wales has worked to support young people and other causes for the benefit of the wider community.
"At Christmas, we feel very fortunate to have our family around us. But for many of you, this Christmas will mean separation from loved ones and perhaps reflection on the memories of those no longer with us.
"I hope that, like me, you will be comforted by the example of Jesus of Nazareth who, often in circumstances of great adversity, managed to live an outgoing, unselfish and sacrificial life. Countless millions of people around the world continue to celebrate his birthday at Christmas, inspired by his teaching.
"He makes it clear that genuine human happiness and satisfaction lie more in giving than receiving; more in serving than in being served.
"We can surely be grateful that, two thousand years after the birth of Jesus, so many of us are able to draw inspiration from his life and message, and to find in him a source of strength and courage.
"I hope that the Christmas message will encourage and sustain you too, now and in the coming year.
"I wish you all a very happy Christmas."
Monday, November 17, 2008
*pause for laughter/disgust...
the United States of America has voted for a new president and that man is Barack Obama. We here at LIFE congratulate him on his victory (albeit over our endorsed candidate) and wish him well on his quest to become a the next "great" president. (on the heels of a great president)
So here is the question as a people, nation, and news outlet, should we show him respect because he is our president? See back in the day the media would go at great length to do what it took to show respect to our president. Or should we rip into him by saying he is an idiot because he is change we cant believe in? Like our current media and people of this nation have done to president Bush. What is the right thing to do and why? Throw it all out here...use the Manifesto if you have to...
Monday, November 3, 2008
Monday, September 22, 2008
Lets go in order (kinda)
First, September 11th
My heart goes out to those who lost family in the terrorist attacks, and the families of those who have died fighting the great threat of Islamic Terrorism. I would also like to thank the brave men and woman of our armed forces who are still fighting to keep the freedoms we currently enjoy. I thank George Bush for staying firm and not degrading to mud slinging, like so many of the "statesman" in Washington.
*Editors note: I generally don't get into the personal side of Bret Reed, but I feel that this is a very important subject and post.
Ok now on to the 12th
Happy anniversary to my mother and father, and happy birthday to dad.
Now lets go back in time a bit, and then come back ahead to the 12th. (that sounds weird)
A while back I was asked a couple of questions that needed to make their way to the blog eventually (kinda). The first was especially asked to be put here on the blog. The second question was not really intended to be directed to the blog, but I felt that I didn't do a good job answering it. I'll take another shot at it here. (the asker will remain anonymous, because I don't know if they wanted their name attached)
Where do you get your morality (or lack of it) from, how does it affect you, and what makes you chose to believe what you believe? I know most of you reading this will say that the Bible is what you believe, and that you follow Jesus Christ. What makes makes you believe this? Think well about your answer. (my personal answer after the next question)
What does "born again" mean to you?
I apologize for not following this verse very well. 1 Peter 3:15 (KJV) But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
“Born again” Is when someone first becomes a Christian. A man by the name of Nicodemus asked Jesus about it in John chapter 3. Ok so how do you “first become a Christian” or how are you “born again” or “saved”? Many believe that you can be “born again” through good works, or being baptized or many other good works. The Bible clearly states that there is nothing we can do to work our way to heaven (the major problem with most religions today)
Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Here is what the Bible says you do have to do.
Acts 2:21 (King James Version) And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
To tie the questions together, here is my story and why I believe the Bible. Even though my world view may be limited I have seen enough to convince me that the Bible is totally correct. I've heard most or all of the arguments for and against the Bible. While there are good points both ways, nothing can change what I have seen God do in my life my, my parents lives, and Christians all around me.
This link offers 10 reasons that can also not be refuted.
Ok, so here is my story about how I became a Christian.
As most of you know our family lived in WI for the first half of my life. During that time we attended the Greater Point Baptist Church (pastored by Woody Bamgardner) I am sure you have heard of CBH Ministries, Children's Bible Hour, Keys for kids, Uncle Charlie, Adventures in Odyssey, Sugar Creek Gang etc. When I was younger I really liked things like that (still do, just don't listen to it much) well they, I think CBH, put out a monthly booklet for kids, I don't remember the name of it. Anyway it had things in it like "fill in the blank" look here in your Bible and write this verse here, and in the first booklet, last question was "Have you ever been Born Again" or something like that. I don't remember much at all about this part, but I think I asked my mom, who was helping me because I didn't know how to write or anything, what it meant. What she said or I prayed or when exactly the date was I don't at all remember, but I do know that she wrote it in the booklet. O and you sent the booklet back in and they sent it back with a grade. I remember getting it back saying "Congratulations" signed by the part that the date was written.
Many years passed...
For whatever reasons I began to have doubts "Am I imagining what I did" "did I say it right." This went on for a long time. On and on until the BBFC had their Basic LIFE Principles Seminar, and Bill Gothard talked about doubts of salvation etc. He managed to list EVERY doubt I had right in a row. He told a story about a man having doubts especially about the "date," "his age when he was saved," and all the rest. One day the man was mowing his lawn, had the doubts, and couldn't stand it anymore. Bill said the man got it settled going to the barn by taking a board and writing on it the date and time and praying for salvation right there.
(KJV) Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
After I heard that I was kinda like, "well thats nice but once saved always saved" but the doubts were still there and maybe even more so. Another not so long a time passed. In September our church always has it's "campmeeting," after the first couple of services it was time to get it settled. On September 12, 2007 I prayed the "Sinners Prayer" and was Born Again. Praise the Lord! I wrote down the date on a board, and put it in the ground under a tree I was kneeling by. I cannot thank Him enough! I felt so free of guilt and sin.
I hope that if anyone has any questions that they will email me, and I will do my best to answer them.
Staff Editor S-S
Thursday, August 7, 2008
As always my comments appear in italics. (sept for the Bible verses at the end)
During the course of my life, I've interacted with many Christians of various persuasions. There have been the "conservative" and the "liberal" and anywhere inbetween. I'd say that a great percentage of the Christians I know believe in the Bible as God's Word and hold to basic orthodox beliefs about God the Trinity, the atonement, the second coming, the final judgment, etc. BUT I have become increasingly aware of the great differences in other areas, small or great.
Let's take group A. They love God, they love the Bible, and they study it diligently that they may apply it to their lives. They are probably also influenced by other sources, such as denominational precedents, books, teachers, the culture, etc.
Let's take group B. They love God, they love the Bible, and they study it diligently that they may apply it to their lives. They are probably also influenced by other sources, such as denominational precedents, books, teachers, the culture, etc.
Looks like they should be in unity, right? Wrong. Between groups A and B (and even individuals within those groups) you can be sure to find differences of belief in areas such as:
-Women's attire (including pants, jewelry, and head coverings)
-Women's role in society and the church
-When the Tribulation will be
-Probably more that I can't think of at present
Some may be neutral on one subject because they really don't consider it important or it doesn't affect them, while others will strongly argue their position one way or the other, even giving Scriptures to support it. On either side of an argument, you can find someone who is dogmatic and carnal, and you can find someone who is loving and spiritual.
I wonder what a new believer thinks when they start seeing all this division in the church. Granted, even in New Testament times there appear to have been disagreements about certain subjects (like eating meat offered to idols). But I wonder if there is more dichotomy now than ever. Of course I don't know. Is it a reflection of the end times or that the world has crept so much into the church? Has the culture affected the church more than the church has affected the culture? Can we always know the exact right or wrong on an issue? Does what I believe as right make every opposing view wrong? Unlikely.
Spot-on!!! I couldn't agree more. It would do Christians some good to read Romans 14 a bit more often then we do. I believe that the things she mentioned are really minor. I feel that we miss the major points (read: Ten Commandments) and try and hit the minor points. How do you think it looks to people who are not Christians? Nothing against standards, beliefs, and opinions (like this one) but people take things way to far (again, like this).
Just throwing out some food for thought. I guess the best way to know the truth is to keep connected with the Source of Truth, Jesus. Thank God for the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, Who is there to show us the way one step at a time! This morning I read this:
For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strenghtened with might by His Spirit in the inner man; that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth and height; and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fullness of God. Eph. 3:14-19
What say you?
Great questions Kristi, thank you for allowing me to share it.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
2. For the moment the few guys on this blog will remain on our side of the barbed wire with regard to the schooling debate. One day in the near future our opinions will be said, as it has come to my attention over the last few weeks that it is of more importance, and debate then I had realized at the time I posted it. I had intended it to be a filler before a "Main Event" (which will come soon) but now it will be a debate that has to go on... later
3. As it has already been a crazy start to the summer, and looks like it will continue as such, I doubt that I'll be able to keep up with posting as much as I'd like. I will do my best as some great topics are in the bag like Ron Paul and (something), morals, more BBQing, who I'm voting for and why, and of course more about schooling (sorry kitty, but it must continue)
4.I have been tagged by hamburg, to name my favorite book and such. Normally I do not like this sort of thing (this time is no different) and this is not a personal blog. That being said, before this occasion I was planing on putting up a chat box just for people to discuss any book they are reading, want to read or whatever...
Ok, so, I normally don't like Candorville, but when I saw these two, I had to put them on.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
O yeah "the next edition", for all of you who think you know all these things are wrong (and they're not), and all you people who have no standards, or convictions (JK), I pose this question...
(without looking at your Bible, asking someone, or anything else)
do you know what the 10 Commandments are?
(added 6/28/08) (I don't care about the order you put them in)
Friday, May 23, 2008
O yeah, about the "over" part, "what is over" you ask? Nothing more then the Bear Lake High School Graduation. The only reason that is significant is because (for lack of a better term) it is "my class." To commemorate the event I would like to ask you all a few questions.
#1-Type(s) of high schooling you have been a part of. (home, public,and (or) private school)
#2-What you like about the type(s) of schooling you have gotten.
#3-What you don't like about the type(s) of schooling you have gotten.
#4-How you think your schooling compares to the others mentioned. (those with multiple types of schooling obviously have a preferred opinion)
#5-Any other thoughts on this matter.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Viewer discretion is advised. Thank you.
Ok, here we go, I stand to get in trouble with most of you, but thats ok, I've been in "hot water" before.
The topic: Symbolism *everyone in chorus "what on earth"*
That page was just a start, and not quite what I'm talking about. Obviously "A""B""C"..., the swastika and many other things are are "symbols." I am not talking about these things.
I'm talking about cultural symbols and perceptions, and why I despise most of these, in our great American culture.
Lets take for example, alcohol, it is strongly preached against, and for whatever reason if you claim to be a Christian and someone who is not a Christian sees you drinking a beer (or whatever) they might wounder why they should become a Christian. BUT there is nothing in the Bible the directly says that alcohol is wrong accept "wherein is excess" You are welcome to debate me on this, but you will lose.
Or how about pink, why is it it "feminine," or why has the homosexual group taken it along with the rainbow as their "symbol?" I thought the rainbow was God's?
Don't even get me started on girlfriends, music, "Rev." Jeremiah Wright's, but more on him later. Now, for the record, I have never drank, but pink is a way better color then yellow, orange, and green. It just ticks people off to see my Halo (video game) character wearing pink armor and killing them all the time, not to mention the funny comments I get for it.
The same goes for most of the pet peeves of parents, and pastors in "hard core" Christian churches (bad terminology I know) If you want to ask about a pet peeve, I'll debate it with you, but I'm trying to avoid any problems with people on this.
Here is what C.S. Lewis said in his Screwtape Letters-
Screwtape (a higher demon) is writing to his nephew (a new tempter) Wormwood.
"My dear Wormwood...*skips a paragraph* Never forget that when we are dealing with any pleasures in its healthy and normal and satisfying form, we are, in a sense, on the Enemy's ground. I know we have won many a soul through pleasure. All the same, it is His invention, not ours. He made the pleasure: all our research so far has not enabled us to produce one. All we can do is to encourage the humans to take the pleasures which our Enemy has produced, at times, or in ways, or in degrees, which He has forbidden. Hence we always try to work away from the natural condition of any pleasure to that in which it is least natural, least redolent of its Maker, and least pleasurable. An ever increasing craving for an ever diminishing pleasure is the formula. It is more certain; and it's better style.
And what the said Mr. Wright had to say about it:
(listen to the whole thing, it's so funny and mostly true)
If you are an open minded individual, you have to admit he has a point.
Let me get this straight, sin is sin, period. I just disagree with making things sin (in a Biblical term) or wrong (from the world's point of view) that are not.
Somewhat like what Eve did in the garden of Eden:
Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
You see God never said they can't touch it, He said:
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Why then as a Church, family, or society do we make things wrong that are clearly not?
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Thank you to all who voted "yea" (and the one who voted "nay") in the poll. Thank you "jimmy" for relinquishing command of LIFE, and I hope your continued adventure with The Times in which we live goes vary well.
Thank you all,
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
This question was posted on my friend liberty's blog, she has kindly allowed me to post it here.
"Is Romans 13 speaking of submitting to government:
"Alright, all of you readers of this blog, I need y'all to give me your beliefs on the passage of Romans 13. The question I'm posing:
(1) in every aspect, at all times
(2) only if it is in accordance with God's principles
(3) Neither. It is speaking of spiritual leaders.
I'd appreciate all view points!"
My original reply-
"Using just Romans 13 I don't think I can make a legitimate argument for:
“(1) in every aspect, at all times.”
I don't think you could find anything, anywhere in the Bible to support this.
“(2) only if it is in accordance with God's principles.”
This is the position I support based on the whole Bible.
“(3) Neither. It is speaking of spiritual leaders.”
In the first part of the chapter it sounds like Paul is talking about government and in the last part it sounds like spiritual church leaders etc...
Personal opinion only, well hmm, I have to go with “spiritual leaders”
One other person commented there, but I didn't ask if it was ok to post it. Liberty, do you agree with any of my answers? If so I wont have to argue the points!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Just a quick refresher course lest we forget what has happened to many "friends" of the Clinton 's
3- Vince Foster - Former counselor and colleague of at 's Rose Law firm. Died of a gunshot wound to the head, ruled a suicide.
8-Jerry Parks -Head of Clinton's gubernatorial security team in . Gunned down in his car at a deserted intersection outside . Park's son said his father was building a dossier on Clinton . He allegedly threatened to reveal this information. After he died the files were mysteriously removed from his house.
28-Keith Coney - Died when his motorcycle slammed into the back of a truck, 7/88.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
My comments are in italics.
I have his permission to post this as an op-ed.
If you want to contact him, his email is-
Shalom Bret Reed
At the beginning of my letter I would like to introduce myself. My name is Ryszard Ewiak and I live in Poland. I believe that the Bible is God's Word in which He revealed what will happen in the future and also the road to people's salvation. For over 30 years I have studied God's prophecies. Recently I have decided to send a short biblical analysis to people all over the world. (Amos 3:7,8)
To achieve this I am searching the Internet for people who love God and are interested in His prophecies. I am sending you a short analysis on Daniel chapter 11. He found my blogger profile
Who is "the king of the north"? Some insightful Bible students noticed, the proof lies in the obvious identity that exists between Daniel's "the king of the north" in the last days and Ezekiel's "Gog" of the latter days. By comparing what is said about each of them in the two prophecies, it is manifest that they can only be different titles for the same being.
Ezekiel Chapter 38 and 39 = Daniel 11:45
1. Their geographical position is the same. "Gog's" country is in the north part in relation to the Holy Land; as it is written, "Thou shalt come from thy place out of the north parts". "Gog" is therefore "the king of the north", his place or country being there.
2. Both of them are adversaries of Israel and invaders of the Holy Land. The eleventh chapter of Daniel abundantly proves this in relation to "the king of the north"; and of "Gog", Yahoueh said: "Thou shalt come up against my people Israel, as a cloud to cover the land".
3. The time they invade the land is the same. "The king of the north" invades in the last days. Of "Gog" it is said: "It shall be in the latter days, and I will bring thee against my land".
4. The same peoples are named as components of their armies. The Libyans and Ethiopians are allies with "the king of the north"; and in the enumeration of Gog's forces, it says, "Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them".
Who is "Gog"? Which land is the land of "Magog"?Some people think that "Gog" is the Devil. But does the context support this idea? Ezekiel wrote that after "Gog's" last attack he will fall and then be buried by the people. (Ez.39:4,11) So there is no need to prove that "Gog" represents the Devil as we know that the devil does not have a body of flesh and bone and has no need for a grave. Thus, in actuality, whom does "Gog" symbolize?
"Gog" is the chief prince of Meschech and Tubal.
"Meshech, the sixth son of Japheth (Genesis 10:2) is the founder of a tribe (1 Chronicles 1:5; Ezekiel 27:13; 38:2,3). They were in all probability the Moschi people, inhabiting the Moschian Mountains, between the Black and the Caspian Seas. In Psalms 120:5 the name occurs simply as a synonym for foreigners or barbarians. "During the ascendency of the Babylonians and Persians in Western Asia, the Moschi were subdued; but it seems probable that a large number of them crossed the Caucasus range and spread over the northern steppes, mingling with the Scythians. There they became known as Muscovs and gave this name to the Russian nation and its ancient capital by which they are still generally known throughout the East" (Easton's Bible Dictionary).
Many ancient sources have clearly identified "Magog" as referring to the "Scythians".
One of the earliest references to Magog was made by Hesiod, "the father of Greek didactic poetry" who identified Magog with the Scythians and southern Russia in the 7th century B.C. Hesiod was a contemporary of Ezekiel.
Josephus Flavius clearly identified Magog. "Magog founded the Magogians, thus named after him, but who were by the Greeks called Scythians". (Josephus, Antiquities, 1.123; Jerome, Commentary on Ezekiel 38:2)
The Greek historian Herodotus wrote that in the fifth century B.C. the Scythians ruled from the Don River, in present southern Russia, to the Carpathian Mountains in central Europe.
Philo, is another historian in the first century A.D. who identified "Magog" with southern Russia.
Ancient authorities clearly identified the Scythians as the ancestors of the present day Russians.
However, even without that information, the identity of "Magog" is not too difficult to figure out. In Ezekiel 38:15, it says: "And thou shalt come from thy place out of the north parts, thou, and many people with thee". The "north parts" is literally the "extreme, or uttermost" parts of the north.
Who are "the kings of the north" and "south"? Who are the "kings" of this chapter?
Since the Prophecy was given in the third year of Cyrus (Daniel 10:1), the three kings that were to "stand up yet", that is, "after him", were Cambyses II, Smerdis the Magian imposter, Darius I Hystaspes.
The fourth king, Xerxes I, stirred up Persia against Greece, which he invaded in 480 B.C. but failed to conquer. Since prophecy touches only upon important events and characters, the remaining kings of Persia are omitted, and the prophecy jumps over nearly 150 years to the time of Alexander the Great 336-323 B.C.E.
"A valiant king", Alexander the Great, whose kingdom after his death was divided into four parts.
1) Seleucus I - who began the Seleucid (Syrian) empire, from Turkey to India.
2) Cassander - who took over Macedonia (Greece).
3) Lysimachus - who took Thracia (between Greece and Turkey).
4) Ptolemy I - who ruled over Egypt.
After the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C., the throne of Egypt fell to Ptolemy I Soter, the son of Lagus, the king of the south.
"One of his princes", Seleucus I, Nicator ["the king of the north"] also rose to power, and took over the region of Syria. He eventually became more powerful than his former Egyptian ruler.
"The daughter of the king of the south" = Berenice II, daughter of Ptolemy II Philadelphus.
"The king of the north" = Antiochus II Theos.
Two years after the marriage, Berenice's father (Ptolemy Philadelphus) died.
Antiochus restored Laodice and put away Berenice.
He was then poisoned by Laodice.
Berenice fled with her children to Daphne where she was killed.
A "branch of her roots" will come with an army. This was Berenice's brother, Ptolemy III Euregetes, "the king of the south".
"The king of the north" is Seleucus II Kallinikos, son of Laodice who was defeated in a later invasion of Egypt. He lost most of Asia Minor along with losing to the military expansion of Ptolemy III who put his mother, Laodice, to death.
Verse 9: "And [the king of the north] will enter into the kingdom of the king of the south, but will return to his own land". (literal translation)
Seleucus II, son of the deceased Laodice, sought revenge for the vengeance taken by Ptolemy III. "Justin says that he fitted out a great fleet, which was destroyed by a violent storm; and after this he raised a great army to recover his dominion, but was defeated by Ptolemy, and fled in great terror and trembling to Antioch". (Gill's Commentary)
His ["the king of the north"] sons = Seleucus III Ceraunus and Antiochus III the Great.
"The king of the north" = Antiochus III, the Great.
"The king of the south" = Ptolemy IV Philopator.
Ptolemy IV defeated the much larger army of Antiochus III at the Battle of Raphia in 217.
"The king of the south" = Ptolemy V Epiphanes.
"The king of the north" = Antiochus III.
Antiochus III gives his daughter Cleopatra I to Ptolemy V, in hopes of permanent influence in Egypt.
Verse 14a: "And in those times many will rise against the king of the south".
At this time, many of the Egyptians began rebelling against the ruling Grecian family and began rioting and defying them.
Verse 14b: "And the sons of the violent ones of your people shall rise up to establish the vision, but they shall stumble". (LIT)
This verse speaks of the violent sons of Daniel's nation. Many commentators suggest that these people will stand up against the king of the south, but this text foretells that these people will lift themselves up to establish the vision. They were called a violent people by Ezekiel who in this way described them as shedders of blood. (18:10a) The word vision [in Aramaic chezev; in Hebrew chazown] is used in the Book of Daniel e.g. in: 7:1,2,7,13,15; 8:1,2,13,15,17,26; 9:24; 10:14; 11:14. All of these visions prophecy of the future persecution of God's nation, that would be fulfilled in the distant future. (Daniel 8:17; 10:14)
What kind of violent people would lift themselves in the ancient time, to fulfill the inspired visions and prophecies before their time? The First Book of the Maccabees clearly indicates the Maccabees as being these violent people. (1:54; 6:7) Until now, many commentators believe that the Maccabees fulfilled the prophecies of the Book of Daniel. But Jesus said that the vision which concerns the abomination of desolation and the persecutions of God's nation will be fulfilled in the future. (Compare Matthew 24:15; Revelation 13:1-8)
Verse 11:16b "and he standeth in the desirable land, and it is wholly in his hand". (YLT)
After one hundred years, Palestine again changed hands. The Seleucid king, Antiochus III, took control of Palestine c. 200 B.C.E.
Antioch III against the Roman Empire.
"Ruler" = Lucius Cornelius, the Roman general.
The Romans humbled him (191) at Thermopylae and again at Magnesia (190).
Subsequently, Antiochus was forced to campaign within his own lands to stop his satraps from declaring themselves independent rulers.
"He shall stumble and fall, and shall not be found" = end of the period of greatness for the Seleucid Empire. (Compare Revelation 18:21; Jeremiah 51:64)
"And stood up on his station hath one causing an exactor to pass over the honour of the kingdom, and in a few days he is destroyed, and not in anger, nor in battle". (YLT)
"The king of the north" = Caesar Augustus. The first Roman emperor.
"The king of the south" not on the scene.
In 2 B.C., Augustus sent out "an exactor" by ordering a registration, or census, most likely to learn the size of the population for purposes of taxation and military conscription. Because of this decree, Joseph and Mary traveled to Bethlehem for registration, resulting in Jesus' birth at that foretold location. (Micah 5:2; Matthew 2:1-12)
Daniel didn’t prophecy that "the king of the north" would die "after a few days" from this event, but would die in the undetermined future "after a few days". In the end of July, in the year 14 A.D., August left Rome. He took a vacation in his old age and health. On the 19th of August, after a short sickness, he "passed away peacefully, not feeling any pain". While traveling in Campania, Augustus died "in a few days", neither "in anger" at an assassin's hands nor "in warfare", but after a short illness.
Many say that "the king of the north" is Seleucus IV Philopater, who sent out his finance minister, Heliodorus to collect taxes. But Seleucus was murdered in a conspiracy engineered by Heliodorus. It is said that the king here was to however die a natural death (not one of anger or of battle). Therefore, this writing does not conform to Seleucus IV. Also, verse 21 cannot carry over to the rule of Antiochus IV Epiphanes!
Verse 21: "And in his place shall arise a despised. And they will not give him the royal majesty. He will come in a time of peace and will seize the kingdom through duplicity".
"The king of the north" = Tiberius 14-37.
"The king of the south" not on the scene.
"The ruler of the covenant" = Jesus [Yeshua].
Augustus only chose him after more favored heirs had died.
The New Encyclopoedia Britannica says, Tiberius played politics with the Senate and did not allow it to name him emperor for almost a month [after Augustus died]". He told the Senate that no one but Augustus was capable of carrying the burden of ruling the Roman Empire and asked the senators to restore the republic by entrusting such authority to a group of men rather than to one man. "Not daring to take him at his word", wrote historian Will Durant, "the Senate exchanged bows with him until at last he accepted power". Durant added: "The play was well acted on both sides. Tiberius wanted the principate, or he would have found some way to evade it; the Senate feared and hated him, but shrank from reestablishing a republic based, like the old, upon theoretically sovereign assemblies". Thus, Tiberius took hold of the kingdom by means of duplicity.
Verse 22: "And the arms of the flood shall be swept from before his face, and they will be broken, and also the ruler of a covenant".
In 15 A.D., Germanicus led his forces against the German hero Arminius, with some success. However, the limited victories were won at great cost, and Tiberius thereafter aborted operations in Germany. Instead, by promoting civil war, he tried to prevent German tribes from uniting. Tiberius generally favoured a defensive foreign policy and focused on strengthening the frontiers. This stance was fairly successful. In this way "the arms of the flood" were controlled and were "broken".
"Broken" too was "the Leader of the covenant" = Jesus [Yeshua]. (Compare Isaiah 55:4; Daniel 9:25, 27a)
Verse 23: "And after they join themselves to him, he will do guile, and he will exalt himself, and will do strong by a few of the people".
The oath of loyalty bound the army and officials to the Tiberius.
"Sextus Pompeius and Sextus Apuleius, the consuls, were the first to swear allegiance to Tiberius Caesar, and in their presence the oath was taken by Seius Strabo and Caius Turranius, respectively the commander of the praetorian cohorts and the superintendent of the corn supplies. Then the Senate, the soldiers and the people did the same". Those few people were the Roman Praetorian Guard, encamped close to Rome's walls. Its proximity intimidated the Senate and helped Tiberius keep in check any uprisings against his authority among the populace. By means of some 10.000 guards Tiberius remained mighty.
"In a time of peace he will come against [sense: will attack] the fattest [sense: mighty] of the land, and he will do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers: prey, and spoil, and substance, their possession he will distribute. And against strongholds he will devise his schemes until the appointed time".
"The king of the north" = Tiberius and next emperors.
"The king of the south" not on the scene.
The word "mashman" refers here to fattest [sense: mighty]. (Compare Ps.78:31 and Is.10:16)
Because he was very suspicious, Emperor Tiberius, extended the law of laesa majestas. Many senators were put to death on a charge of treason against the emperor. For the people of the provinces, it was a peaceful and well-ordered time.
Aurelian (270-275) against Queen Zenobia of Palmyra ["the king of the south"].
The Palmyrene army occupied Egypt in 269 B.C.E. under the pretext of making it secure for Rome. Zenobia wanted to make Palmyra the dominant city in the east and wanted to rule over Rome's eastern provinces. Alarmed by her ambition, Aurelian aroused "his power and his heart" to proceed against Zenobia.
Zenobia valiantly defended it, but without success. She and her son fled toward Persia, only to be captured by the Romans at the Euphrates River. The Palmyrenes surrendered their city in 272 B.C. Aurelian spared Zenobia, making her the prize feature in his triumphal procession through Rome in 274 B.C. She spent the rest of her life as a Roman matron.
Aurelian himself 'did not stand because of schemes against him.' In 275 B.C., he set out on an expedition against the Persians. While he was waiting in Thrace for the opportunity to cross the straits into Asia Minor, those who 'ate his food' carried out schemes against him and brought about his "breakdown". He was going to call his secretary Eros to account for irregularities. Eros, however, forged a list of names of certain officers marked for death. The sight of this list moved the officers to plot Aurelian's assassination and to murder him.
Daniel 11:26b. (Compare Daniel 9:26b)
"and his army will be flooded and many will fall down slain".
Decline and fall of the Roman Empire.
"The strength of Aurelian had crushed on every side the enemies of Rome. After his death they seemed to revive with an increase of fury and of numbers".
"And both these kings, their hearts (will be) to do mischief, and at one table (they) will speak a lie. But it will not succeed, for yet (the) finish to (the) appointed time." (11:27, literal translation)
It certainly suggests that the verse does not concern to the ancient times. It describes the end of times right before the appointed time. (Compare Daniel 11:29a)
Russia and England (from second half of the XIX Century).
Egyptian history dates back to about 4000 B.C., when the kingdoms of upper and lower Egypt, already highly sophisticated, were united. Egypt's golden age coincided with the 18th and 19th dynasties (16th to 13th century B.C.), during which the empire was established. Persia conquered Egypt in 525 B.C.E, Alexander the Great subdued it in 332 B.C.E., and then the Ptolemaic dynasty ruled the land until 30 B.C., when Cleopatra, last of the line, committed suicide and Egypt became a Roman, then Byzantine, province. Arab caliphs ruled Egypt from 641 until 1517, when the Turks took it for their Ottoman Empire. Napoléon's armies occupied the country from 1798 to 1801. In 1805, Mohammed Ali, leader of a band of Albanian soldiers, became pasha of Egypt. After completion of the Suez Canal in 1869, the French and British took increasing interest in Egypt. British troops occupied Egypt in 1882, and British resident agents became its actual administrators, though it remained under nominal Turkish sovereignty. In 1914, this fiction was ended, and Egypt became a protectorate of Britain.
Russia grew expanding its power over huge regions, and by the end of XIX century Russia possessed territories from the mouths of the Danube and Visla in the west, reached the Pacific Ocean in the east, began in the Euroasian tundra in the north and had borders with Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan and China in the south.
In 1907, an Anglo-Russian agreement divided Persia into English and Russian spheres of influence, a large Russian sphere in the north, covering the most valuable part of the country, a neutral sphere in the centre, and a smaller British sphere in the southeast.
"And (he) ["the king of the north"] will go back (to) his land with great wealth; and his heart (will be) against the holy covenant; and will act effectively; and turned back to his own land." (literal translation)
History of Russia after World War II.
The passage contains enough details, which allow for a correct interpretation.
Daniel foretells here that "the king of the north" [Russia] will not only be successful in WW II, but also that he returns to his land with a great amount of goods. If only Hitler had listened to Mussolini and the Japanese, who in 1943 advised him to stop military actions, the prophetic detail would have never been fulfilled.
"and turned back to his own land".
The break-up of the Soviet Union and return to the country of Russian garrisons (the liquidation of Russian military bases).
The prophecy of Daniel 11 is the key to understanding what is going to happen in the future.
The latter statements Jesus' and Daniel's are alike.
Matthew 24:5,6 (Luke 21:8,9) = Daniel 11:27,28 = XIX, XX, XXI Century, before the World War III
"Many for will come in the name of me, saying: 'I am the anointed'; and many they will mislead." (Matthew 24:5, literal translation)
"He said, 'Watch out that you don't get led astray, for many will come in my name, saying, 'I AM,' and, 'The time is at hand.' Therefore don't follow them." (Luke 21:8, WEB)
"Don't be afraid when you hear of wars and revolutions; such things must happen first, but they do not mean that the end is near." (Luke 21:9, GNB)
Matthew 24:7 = Daniel 11:29,30 = WW III
Matthew 24:15 = Daniel 11:31 = "trampling of Jerusalem" [the great tribulation of Christian minorities; compare Revelation 11:2]
Matthew 24:29 = Daniel 11:40 = WW IV
"At (the) appointed time (he) will return, and will enter into (the) south."
1. Russian troops will be station abroad again.
2. "The king of the north" will come into the South.
"But will not be as (the) former or as (the) latter. For will come against him (the) dwellers of coastlands of Kittim, and (he) will be humbled, and will return." (literal translation)
1. The West will come against the Russia.
2. "The king of the north" will be humbled, and will return. (Compare Matthew 24:7; Revelation 6:4)
1. The nations will trample "the holy city" [of those who belong to Christ] forty-two months. (Compare Revelation 11:2,7; 13:5,7a; Luke 21:24b; Matthew 24:21,22; Daniel 7:25; 9:27; Isaiah 29:1-8,20-24; Matthew 13:40-43,49,50; Ezekiel 13:8-16,20-23; 34:10; 2 Thessalonians 2:8b; Isaiah 28:1-4,17-22; 6:13; Malachi 3:1-5)
The religious organizations from among Christian minorities which Jesus compared to "the weeds", will be "burned". (Mt.13:30) Yahoueh will protect the righteous ones. (Re.11:1) "The wheat" will be put into "the storehouse" after the tribulation – which means that "the sons of the kingdom" will become gathered and unified at that time. They will shine as brightly as the sun after the tribulation.
2. "The abomination of desolation" [the World Government] will be set up. (Revelation 13:7b; Daniel 12:11)
Details of their future global religious persecution. (Compare Daniel 8:11,12; Revelation 6:9-11; 12:15)
Russia before the World War IV. (Compare Ezekiel 38:7)
The World War IV. (Compare Luke 21:25; Isaiah 5:26-30; Matthew 24:29; Daniel 7:11; Revelation 13:3; Ezekiel 32:2-16; Habakkuk 1:5-17; Revelation 6:12; Zephaniah 1:14-18; Joel 2:1-11,31, ASV)
Occupation of Israel. (Compare Ezekiel 39:23-29)
The triumph of Russia. (Compare Isaiah 10:12-15)
Russia again will attack Israel. (Compare Daniel 12:1; Joel 2:20; Isaiah 14:4-27; Habakkuk 3:3-16)
"Many will study, therefore understanding will be multiplied". (Daniel 12:4b)
Well, what is the Bible's scenario?
1. Russian troops station abroad again. (Daniel 11:29a)
2. "The king of the north" becomes very aggressive and enters into the south. (Daniel 11:29a)
3. The West opposes Russia. (Daniel 11:30; Matthew 24:7a; Revelation 6:4)
4. "The king of the north" is humiliated, and turns back. (Daniel 11:30). He does not make the same mistake as Hitler did, he does not fight to the death and this is why Russia is not occupied.
5. The World Government appears after that war which replaces the ineffective UNO. Its power gradually rises up. (Revelation 13:1,2,7b; Daniel 11:31b)
6. Russia rebuilds its military power very fast and acts effectively on the world scene. (Daniel 11:30b)
7. "Russia’s rulers pay attention to those "who forsake the holy covenant". (Daniel 11:30b)
8. A man "of fierce countenance, and understanding ambiguous sayings" becomes the president of the USA, and he begins to fight with Christian minorities. (Daniel 8:23-25)
9. There is a tribulation of "Jerusalem" = it is a tribulation of Christian minorities, which lasts 42 month’s. (Daniel 11:31a; Matthew 24:15; Revelation 13:5-7a; Matthew 13:40-42,49,50; 24:48-51)
The Christian communities, which are now called sects, are decimated. It is the biggest genocide concerning religion in history. The eyes of people who were deceived by them will be opened. (Isaiah 6:9-13)
The "tyrant", according to LXX “lawless” = the rulers of Christian minorities will be removed. (Isaiah 29:1-8,20,21) Ezekiel calls them "women". (Ezekiel 13:17-23; Revelation 14:4a; Isaiah 3:12) Paul names them "the man of lawlessness". (2 Thessalonians 2:4,8b)
10. Immediately after the tribulation of those days "the abomination of desolation", in other words the World Government will be set up [will given authority; Revelation 13:7b]. (Daniel 11:31b; 12:11) The Book of Revelation calls it a "beast". (11:7; 13:1,2,7,8)
11. The spirit is poured out upon people who belong to Jesus. (Revelation 11:11-13) The "wheat" = the sons of kingdom, will be gathered into the "storehouse" after burning the "weeds" = organized Christian churches which earlier posed as the churches of Christ. (Matthew 13:30b; Eph.1:9,10) And then Jesus will set up a "faithful slave" over his whole possession. (Matthew 24:45-47)
12. The seven trumpets start to sound. Those who belong to Jesus are revealing future events to the World. They will also try to explain what God thinks of certain issues. (Revelation 8:6-10:11)
13. The power in Russia will be taken over by a dictator who is atheist. The military power will be his god. (Daniel 11:36-39)
14. Not longer after that, there will be the WW IV. That time Russia will triumph the same as it did after the WWII. (Daniel 11:40; Daniel 7:11; Luke 21:25; Revelation 13:3a). "The king of the north" will act as a "God’s hammer" ravaging many countries like Babylon in ancient times. (Jeremiah 51:20,25)
15. Russia occupies Israel as well. (Daniel 11:41)
16. After that war the World Government is resuscitated. The "purple beast" will be given even more power. The politicians will relinquish their sovereignty in favour of the beast. (Revelation 13:14; 17:8,17)
17. Attack on "Babylon the Great" = big, apostasized churches, drunk with blood of innocent people, which betrayed God and Jesus by co-operating with kings of the earth. (Revelation 17:16)
18. Next, nations see the sign of the Son of man (Matthew 24:30). Probably it will be connected with the first resurrection (Revelation 20:6). People who have died in union with Jesus will rise first (among 144.000). They will get a spirit body at the resurrection. (1 Corinthians 15:35,44) What will be the proof of the resurrection? Immediately after that, remaining of 144.000 will be transfigured (1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17). Simultaneously they will be caught away from the earth and taken to heaven. The transfigurations of belonging to Jesus dependably will not be seen and it will cause a great expression on nations.
19. The whole nation of Israel is converting and gathering. (Ezekiel 39:25-29; Romans 11:25-32). After taking to heaven belonging to group of 144.000 nation of Israel will be a light for the nations. God will be with them and will pour his spirit over them. (Ezekiel 39:29)
20. Rebuilding of the Temple according to directions given to Ezekiel. (Ezekiel 37:24-28; 43:11)
21. There will be collection of chosen, separation the "sheep from the goats". (Matthew 24:31; 25:31-44; Revelation 14:15,16)
22. "The king of the north" will attack people who worship the true God [Israel] (Ezekiel 38:10-12). "The beast" [the word government] also will take part in this attack. (Revelation 19:19)
23. After Armageddon the power on the world will be taken over by the "new heaven" = the kingdom of God i.e. Jesus and belonging to him. (Daniel 7:27; Matthew 6:10; Revelation 21:1-4) "The old heaven" = imperfect system of authority created by man will go away. Rules and the law created by imperfect people which are captivating and making difficulty will be untied. All activities remaining uncovered, good or bad will be revealed, all crimes will come to light. (2 Peter 3:10; 1 Timothy 5:25)
24. The rest of dead will come to life! The earth will become the paradise. (Acts 24:15; Psalm 37:29; Isaiah 11:6-9; 25:8; 35:5-7). When the thousand year’s period of Jesus’ kingdom will end people who come to life during this period are put to the test. And then they will really come to life God’s point of view and then they will get ability to live forever. (Revelation 20:5a,7,8; comp. Luke 15:32; 1 John 3:14).
"Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things do I declare: before they spring forth will I cause you to hear them". (Isaiah 42:9)
With best wishes in Christ,
So what do you think?