Regarding the debate of whether the Book of Daniel is about God's kingdom or not consider the following at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_2 . "The overall theme of the Book of Daniel is God's sovereignty over history.[5]" I agree with that statement in the Wikipedia article. When I read the book of Daniel I see claims of Yahweh Elohim's sovereignty being taught throughout the book. I see that (according to the book) of Yahweh choosing the king of Babylon to conquer Judah, in Yahweh choosing the king of Media-Persia to conquer the kingdom of Babylon, in so-called foretelling subsequent kingdoms (of Greece and Roman), and of God's messianic kingdom conquering all pagan kingdoms. I also see it regards to the account of the "pushing" of the kings of the north and of the south and that Michael will take action.
Simple Question Re 1914
by Slidin Fast 540 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Disillusioned JW
-
Jeffro
đ¤Śââď¸
-
Disillusioned JW
Regarding the issue of God's sovereignty over history being taught in the book of Daniel, I also see it in the regards to the image that Daniel and his friends (and everyone else in the pagan kingdom) are told to bow down to, and in people being told not pray (or petition) to anyone but the pagan king, for a period of time. I also see the issue of God's sovereignty over history being taught in other parts of the book of Daniel.
-
Jeffro
The book of Daniel is all about the period immediately before it was written in the 2nd century BCE. Specifically religious oppression under Antiochus IV Epiphanes with reference to Babylon as a metaphor. It also includes exaggerated end times claims typical of the apocalyptic genre. The inherent Jewish bias that their god was (already) sovereign is unsurprising. -
scholar
Jeffro
The book of Daniel is all about the period immediately before it was written in the 2nd century BCE. Specifically religious oppression under Antiochus IV Epiphanes with reference to Babylon as a metaphor. It also includes exaggerated end times claims typical of the apocalyptic genre. The inherent Jewish bias that their god was (already) sovereign is unsurprising.
---
Absolute rubbish! I see that the previous poster quotes from a Wikipedia source showing that the book of Daniel is about God's Kingdom which nicely agrees with the source I cited that you ignored but when it suits your argument you are quite happy to quote Wikipedia in a post referring to the history of the Bible Students.
scholar JW
-
Jeffro
âscholarâ:
Absolute rubbish! I see that the previous poster quotes from a Wikipedia source showing that the book of Daniel is about God's Kingdom which nicely agrees with the source I cited that you ignored but when it suits your argument you are quite happy to quote Wikipedia in a post referring to the history of the Bible Students.
Wrong again. I didnât quote Wikipedia on this thread. I did provide one citation to a Wikipedia article for more information about the 1917 Watch Tower Society presidency dispute, but did not quote from that article either. It seems your are even more easily confused than I thought. But even if I had quoted Wikipedia on a different subject, it wouldnât change the fact that God establishing a future kingdom is in fact not the âmain themeâ of Daniel. It is entirely mundane that Godâs kingdom is a theme in Daniel, with the obvious Jewish view that their own deity is âsovereignâ, and with its 2 brief references to exaggerated claims about the Jewsâ anticipated salvation after a period of oppression. None of it has anything to do with JWs entirely incorrect chronology of the Neo-Babylonian period or 1914.
-
waton
"It is entirely mundane that Godâs kingdom is a theme in Daniel " Jeffro the scholar
Wt writers perplexed me with mundane food*. The diet of grass the crazed Nebuchadnezzar ate, unprepared (still remember the unkempt emperor's hairdo, at ground level).
How wt twisted the meaning of that episode into the symbol for the "Kingdom of God being abased between 607 and 1914" is an incredible feat. imho. it is an degrading insult that can only be excused as the product of twisted minds.
* pertaining to the mouth,"Mund" in german.
-
scholar
Jeffro
Wrong again. I didnât quote Wikipedia on this thread. I did provide one citation to a Wikipedia article for more information about the 1917 Watch Tower Society presidency dispute, but did not quote from that article either. It seems your are even more easily confused than I thought. But even if I had quoted Wikipedia on a different subject, it wouldnât change the fact that God establishing a future kingdom is in fact not the âmain themeâ of Daniel. It is entirely mundane that Godâs kingdom is a theme in Daniel, with the obvious Jewish view that their own deity is âsovereignâ, and with its 2 brief references to exaggerated claims about the Jewsâ anticipated salvation after a period of oppression. None of it has anything to do with JWs entirely incorrect chronology of the Neo-Babylonian period or 1914.
---
The simple fact of the matter is that you saw fit to cite a Wikipedia article in support of your argument in relation to the 1917 WT presidency debate so if it was good enough then it is good enough for another poster on another issue to cite or quote Wikipedia to in support of his argument.
As you are an advocate of the Maccabean hypothesis in relation to the timing of Daniel then perhaps you can enlighten us as to whether Neb's tree dream was a real historical event and that Neb was vacant from the throne for a period of time?
scholar JW
-
waton
the simple truth about wt's 1914 prediction was, that they fully expected to go to heaven at the onset of that great Tribulation.
wt still predicts that, to happen, with a new overlapping time line, not later than 2075. trouble is,
Jesus nowhere mentioned any of that. He said instead, The generation will not die until everything is over, has passed, not the beginning.
wt and 1914? wt is wrong, coming and going. from A to Z
-
Jeffro
waton:
* pertaining to the mouth,"Mund" in german.
Huh? âMundaneâ is derived from Latin, ârelating to the worldâ.