by caspian 76 Replies latest jw friends
Heathen
clearly it is an end time prophesy
You're right there, except that the writer of that chapter of Daniel thought the end would be some time shortly after 164 BC. The King of the North was Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and he died a very long time ago.
It was revealed to me last night by our Lord that WisconSIN is really the King of the North.
Excellent post Randy
Fits in with the WT rumourmill
I think Bob or Doug McKenzie should be King of the Great White North
I think Bob or Doug McKenzie should be King of the Great White North
LOL
Ya, hey dar
'Absolute power corrupts absolutely'. In an unaccountable man made organization.
My thoughts on the Watchtower's De facto infallibility...
In 1993 {I remember the primary study article} the Watchtower. had the gall to assert that the( now defunct) mighty Soviet empire..The Watchtowers indomitable 'king of the north'...proclaimed as such in countless watchtower 'divine' publications would be reinstated {in 1993 they said it } as the nemesis of the 'king of the south',(united states,) and go forth and ,'eat much flesh;!! Well, the poor Russian folks can't even feed themselves...
It's like someone said ,'there just may be more truth in marvel comics then there is in the pages of the Watchtower'.....
At least Daffy Duck ain't killing people. 
CityFan--- I gather you are saying saying you don't believe that Daniel wrote that part ? If he did it was written in the 6th or 7th century bce . I don't know why anyone would want to tamper with that part of the bible so think Daniel did write it while in babylonian captivity. I was only trying to apply it to what I see going on today and I do believe there is a reason that the WTBTS insists the king of the south is america where as it is obvious that the description of tne king of the north fits better .
Dogpatch. thanks for the post and links. It seems the wts has changed their teaching on this subject even more than I had originally thought....not that that's a surprise, of course.
But there is a truth to KoN v KoS....
It's 'freedom v tyrrany' or 'conservitives v liberals' or 'ying and yang' or 'the Left v the Right' or 'Labor v Capital' or 'Nice Dad v Strict Mom' or whatever you like to think of it as....
This tension is ever present and, IMO, the WTS just captures this in the context of Daniel and their own self-percieved position in the world.
Max
I may be wrong but isn't the style and words used in the book Daniel an indication that parts of the book were written by writers of differnt periods?
The integrity of Daniel has been a subject of discussion for some time. It sure looks composite, being written in two different languages, and consisting of strictly narrative portions and other apocalyptic portions. But the linguistic cleavage does not correspond to the division by genre, and it is not clear how 2:4b to ch. 6 would be intelligible without 1:1-2:4a, while ch. 7 seems to be so connected with both ch. 2 and ch. 8-12 that it seems difficult to even split the Hebrew and Aramaic portions to different authors. I am still tempted to view 2:4b to ch. 6 as an older (say, 300-200 BC) Aramaic pseudegraph that was worked over by a later prophet. For instance, the story of Nebuchadnezzer's madness in ch. 4 is clearly related to the Prayer of Nabonidus (200 BC, and originally written around 400-300 BC) discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls (i.e. 4Q242), and a comparison of the two stories indicates that the Nebuchadnezzer story is literarily dependent on the earlier Nabonidus story (which preserves some authentic historical details, including the king's residence in Teima, Arabia), and not vice versa. The Septuagint version of Daniel also has additional narratives tacked on at the end (ch. 13-14) which are missing in the Hebrew version; the text, like that of Esther, must have existed in different recensions in the Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek. Finally, the Dead Sea Scrolls contain additional visions of the prophet Daniel, including the Vision of Daniel in 4Q243-245, and possibly the Vision of the Four Trees in 4Q552-553 (thought to date to the first century BC).
