I am reading a book about the middle ages, and I came accross this passage:
"...Genghis Khan (1167 - 1227), the greatest conqueror and butcher in all human history ... The Mongol Empire was the largest land empire in history."
That started me thinking about Daniel and the story of the statue that Nebuchadnezzar has a dream about, and how the statue represented world history, or the nations of the world. From all the preachers, books and stuff on the religious TV networks when I heard about Daniel preach as prophecy, the statue was always interpreted the following way:
1. the head was Babylon -- gold
2. the breast and arms silver -- Alexander the Great
3. belly and thighs brass -- the 4 generals that took over after Alexander kicked the bucket
4. legs of iron -- the Roman Empire
5. feet of iron and clay-- waaalaaaa we jump to the 21st century and that is the loose confederation of the European nations that we have to day.
Plus, the statue represents the kings, rulers, or people in power, and the changing the form of power from absolute power to demrocacy or people that have power but it is not total power that they yield I guess ( that's how it was explain to me). So in this grand scheme of nations in the world that the statue represents where are the following nations:
1. the Inca nation
2. the Mongal nation-- the greatest land nation in the history of the world. You would think that it would be part of the statue. Plus, Genghis had total, absolute power. Maybe he was not important enough?
3. the Egyptain Nation? Ancient Egypt was a nation that rule the world of and on for 3000 years you would think there would be a place in the statue for Egypt.
Just thinking and wondering.
16 comments:
The Bible and the book of Daniel is not an all inclusive history of all man-kind and every kingdom of the world. Daniel was written to encourage the Jews that were exiled by revealing God's plan for them, both during and after the time of Gentile control in the world. Above every other theme in the book of Daniel is the sovereignty of God and His control over the affairs of all rulers and nations, and their eventual replacement with the True King.
God had not suffered defeat in allowing Israel to fall, rather He was providentially working His plans toward the eventual display of His King. He allowed Israel to be dominated by Babylon, Medo-Persian, Greece and Rome. A key theme in Daniel in God's kingly control is the Messiah's coming to rule the world in glory over all man.
So, I don't think that you can have an outline of all the history of the world and try to find a correlation in the Bible. Where is the United States in Scripture?
It says in my amplified Bible that the statue represents all the Gentile nations of the world. I guess the footnote is wrong.
My point was though not so much that the statue was an outline of the history of the nations of the world, it was that the gold part of the statue represented a king, ruler, or whatever, that ruled total power, beholding to nothing. The rest of the statue represented people in power who where not all powerful, but the leaders had dimishing power. Then comes Gengus and blows that theory out of the water.
That is my other point: where is United States? The writer of Daniel wrote from a Middle East centric opinion, understanding so I do not believe the story is true representation of the nations of the world. I think that preachers, end of time teachers, and who ever wants to make money out of the end times try to fit history in this passage, but it does not fit.
GK did not conquer all the known world did he??? - Europe was pretty much untouched. He may of had the biggest land mass kingdom... Asia...- but there was a lot more known world that he didn't have. The kingdoms that are referred to in Daniel were conquerers of the known world - as much as possible - they didn't have every person under their thumb - but no significant power.
Sure it fits - its not necessarily a comprehensive picture. It's important not to miss the most important point. If you want - put GK as the feet or wherever - the point is that 'man' may build their kingdoms - but the one that will last and that will crush all the rest will be the Messiah and His Kingdom.
Did I say that GK conquered the whole known world?
I thought that Blackwolf was mom's favorite, that is why he get all the money.
But that is the difference between GK and those kingdom of the statue - GK had a a large kingdom, but those on the statue conquered the world - that's why GK is not 'on' the statue.
Glad to see you back AT1 - everyone has missed your insight!!!
They did not conquer the world. They did not even conquer the known world. What history book are you reading?
The kingdoms named in the statue had control of the known world at that time. There was not any significant power that could strike against the Medo-Persian, Romans, etc. With GK - there were other powers in different parts of the known world that would not have been conquered by GK had he tried.
And plus the nations of the statue represent those countries that had ties to the Hebrew people and had dominion over them.
At the time Genghis Khan ripped everybody apart. There was no one or power that could defeat him. Khan ripped the Romans apart, because the Romans could not defend againest mounted calvary , and what made the Khan's calvary more dangerous was that his people could shoot from the mounted position, the Romans had no defense against it, or no one else could defend against the Mongols.
GK conquared the following countries:
China, Mongolia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Moldova, and Kuwait.
I know that the Babylon empire was not that big in comparison. So you are telling me that my Ampilified Bible is wrong?
Again, I come back to the point of the statue and those empires that would rule over Israel. Five empires in succession would rule over Israel. A stone picturing Christ (Lk 20.13)at His second coming (not rapture) will destroy the fourth empire in it final phase with catastrophic suddenness -Dan 2.34-35,44-45. Christ's total shattering of Gentile power will result in the establishment of His millennial kingdom, the ultimate empire.
GK is not mentioned by Bible scholars in the statue because did not rule over Israel - since Israel was 'destroyed' in AD70 with the desctruction of the temple.
Apparently my memory is not what is was - I did not realize that GK reached as far as he did - I thought he was more isolated to Asia.
So you are telling me that my Ampilifed Bible is wrong in what it stated about the statue.
It is not me that is saying anything is wrong - if anything I agree with what the Amp Bible says - it is you that disagree with Amp Bible and their statement about the kingdoms of the world and not including GK as one of the best or worst, however you want to look at it!
Hey - what was the deleted comment? Inquiring minds want to know!!!
The footnote in the Amplified Bible said that the statue represented all the Gentile nations, not only the nations that conquered Israel. You say that the statue only represents the nations the conquered Israel. Anyways, it may just be all allegory.
Since I could not edit my spelling mistake, I deleted my comment and them republished the comment.
Well, I am not sure - I guess different scholars think different things - you might need a clarification from the Amp Bible of what they mean by 'all' - meaning all world history or all history surrounding the life of Israel and that area. The Bible says that the Christians were scattered - now, I know that that means that they were persecuted and where made to leave there homes and left Jerusalem, etc - but I know it doesn't mean they were scattered to Australia and South America. It comes back to one main point - of our many different discussions about stories of the Bible - what is your belief - are you going to believe that this is the true Word of God - that every word is inspired, that it contains no errors, that it is infallible and inerrent or are you going to believe something different - a collection of some man made-up stories and allegory and myths?
No, I do not remember anything about when you were growing up. Remember you were adopted, so I did not really pay that much attention to you and your little adventures, so really I do not remember.
As for the Bible, how do you know which is to be taken allegoristic , and taken literally. To me you pick and choose. I read book that explained how the Israel borrowed legends from other cultures when they were writing the Old Testement. Where does "El" come from? The book I read explained how the "El" was borrowed and turned into Elohim. Have you read "Legends" by the Ancient Jews? I have.
Which translation of the Bible is:
"that every word is inspired, that it contains no errors, that it is infallible and inerrent" ????
If you say KJV, then which year is inspired? because the KJV was translated about 10 different times, 10 different years. And when Paul(I think) said that the word is inspired what has he talking about? The new testement was not written yet, he was talking about the Torah, right? So to my thinking you can not apply that verse to the new testement because the new testement was not even there at the time.
Post a Comment