Simple? yes, Simplistic?.. Andre, can you tell us how your “not preterist” position on Daniel 8 not break the 70-week prophecy? I am hoping you are not going to bring up Apotelesmatic.
How does one explain Hanukkah?
This week-end’s Lectionary readings include Hebrews 7:23-28.
[SDAs miss a lot by NOT hearing the Lectionary readings in church]
If one continues on to 8:1,2 it says, "Here is the main point: Our High
Priest sat down in the place of honor, next to the throne of the majestic
God in heaven. [Notice they sit side by side. Not one standing in front
of the other.]
The word “Tabernacle” or “Sanctuary” “built”, is that a real edifice, or
is it just used as a “picture” to help in the Jewish mind understanding.?
30 Years later on Patmos, John tells us there is NO BUILDING. That
the Father, Son, Holy Spirit ARE the Temple.
Apparently only 3 chairs make up the “Temple” furnishings.
Another Question – do we have a correct view of “Judgment”, “God’s
Wrath”? Are we preaching a lot of “Fear” when we might be preaching
something else about “Judgment, about Wrath”?
… and why are we looking at Daniel 8, or anything Daniel, to the point of making Daniel the pivotal point of doctrine upon which hangs the entire paradigm of the Adventist faith system.?
Miller, or whoever, wanted to know when the second advent was to take place and went hunting for dates. That initial step, in and of itself, was an error - as defined by Christ’s own words, admonishing us from trying to come up with a date of His return. The rest is a product of a “poisoned tree.” As defined in the practice of law, Ii you start with a fallacy, the rest is pointless and counts for nothing.
It is totally illogical to try to calculate a date for Christ’s return. Our death determines that date. We are all living in “the last days”.
The Adventist faith system is based on a mistake. To make that mistake evolve into an actual denomination that counts for something is quite a feat; but the success of the SDA denomination has nothing to do with the miscalculation of 1844 as a date, or what it’s supposed to stand for. The good parts of the Adventist faith is the community it has created - not it’s theology.
…and now we’re messing with that community. What s going to be left…
This is a picture [an Icon] painted by a Russian Orthodox painter.
It is THE TRINITY sitting around a table. It is believed that the Original had
a small mirror attached to painting at its bottom.
So when a person would admire the painting, one would see their face as part
of the picture, as a Guest at the table, having refreshments WITH the Trinity.
Perhaps this is a better representation of the Book of Hebrews.
10/26/18 - #4
Beautiful, Steve. We also find ourselves, startlingly, as a Guest at the Table in this Caravaggio, rendering the idolatry of entire systems of thought irrelevant:
Supper at Emmaus
Pretty much only Adventists would interpret it that way. And I would hardly call it ruling out predictive prophecy, unless one believes Daniel was written in the 2nd century BC, when in fact there is a lot of evidence it was written in 6th century BC(such as the old style Armaiac and old Persian words).
Ah historicism, a system that developed in the Crusades and got taken up by Luther.
Also, interpreting Daniel 8:14 as being the Seleucid king Antioches is not preterist, not in the slightest. Preterism is when one takes all of apocalyptic literature in the NT and apply it to 70 AD. With this issue, it’s just looking for what makes sense in the immediate context, especially considering the angel literally explains the message in the latter part of Daniel 8.
This is a profound concept. Thank you.
Totally incorrect. The method of “Historicism” derived from the Prophecies themselves and was the hermeneutic of First Century Christians
Hippolytus, a historian and pastor of Porto, near Rome interpreted Daniel’s prophecies to climax with Rome as anti-Christ. Hippolytus died in 235AD, but wrote the following in his commentaries:
“The golden head of the image, and the lioness, denoted the Babylonians; the shoulders and arms of silver, and the bear, represented the Persians and Medes; the belly and thighs of brass, and the leopard, meant the Greeks, who held sovereignty from Alexander’s time; the legs of iron, and the beast dreadful and terrible, expressed the Romans, who hold the sovereignty at present; the toes of the feet which were part clay and part iron, and the ten horns were emblems of the ten kingdoms that are to rise; the other little Horn that grows up among them meant the Antichrist in their midst. . . .”
Rejoice, blessed Daniel! You are not in error: all these things have come to pass. After this again thou hast told me of the beast dreadful and terrible.”
“It had iron teeth and claws of brass: it devoured and brake in pieces and stamped the residue with the feet of it” Already the iron (Rome) rules; already it subdues and breaks all in pieces; already it brings all the unwilling into subjection; already we see these things ourselves . Now we glorify God, being instructed by thee.”
Treatise on Christ and antiChrist AnteNicene Fathers sections 28, 32-33 Vol. 5 p. 210
Brad,is that true of Dan 7 and 8? Daniel appears to be pseudepigrapha. If it existed ca 200 BCE it should have been included in the Prophets section of the Tanach. Instead it is part of the Writings. In which case we’re not talking about a prophecy about Antiochus, we’re talking about a history about Antiochus. No wonder it’s so consistent with 1Maccabees and 2Maccabees.
There’s very good textual/philological evidence Daniel is from the 6th century in the use of ancient Aramaic inconsistent with 2nd century usage.
I am not inclined to read a pseudonymous author. He says that he has a graduate degree in theology. What is that? An MDiv? He is obviously not a biblical scholar. I quickly read something he wrote for Adventist Today and did not come away with the impression that he is smart. Sorry about that.
Phil, what are your academic qualifications? I see on Academia you’re on the Claremont Graduate University faculty but I couldn’t find you in their faculty list, unless you’re posting here as a pseudonym.
The analogy of faith, the analogy of Scripture, the analogy of previous Scripture, and the hermeneutical circle are meritorious and helpful, especially the latter.
It is highly doubtful, based on what we know about linguistics, that your fine-tuned grammatical analysis will take you very far in discerning the meaning of the biblical text. This historical evidence marshaled by Gane constitutes the “historical prong” of the historical-grammatical method of biblical interpretation, which is far superior to a method that is based solely on grammatical analysis. Even the historical-grammatical method is insufficient, as it does formally include everything we have learned about hermeneutics since Schleiermacher.
No, no, no. That’s the wrong Phillip Brantley. I am an attorney in Houston. I live in Sugar Land, Texas and Berrien Springs, Michigan. Law degree from University of Texas Law School, Batchelor of Science degree in political economy from Andrews University. My specialty is hermeneutics. I have read over 600 works on hermeneutics in the last four years. Hermeneutics is not taught in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. There is a class on hermeneutics/inspiration at the Seminary at Andrews University, but very little of the material is covered. (I have read all of the syllabi). There are not more than 7 or 8 Seventh-day Adventists in the world who understand hermeneutics or who have even read the standard literature on hermeneutics. I hope to make a contribution in teaching a little bit of hermeneutics in my participation in these conversations. Hermeneutics is not the most difficult thing in the world to learn, but Seventh-day Adventists have historically been indifferent to this subject matter.
As I’ve already told you in the past, the biblical text is all you have and it’s the closest thing to authorial intention and therefore the meaning of the text.
Even if you dismiss Antiochus IV altogether on Dan 8, a close reading approach still demands that the chapter speak of a Greek little horn not Roman. Rome is nowhere to be found in that chapter and it is that chapter that is central to the Adventist faith.
That’s interesting, because you’re the only Phil Brantley I have in the list of readers my article on academia.edu and the information is as below. Is it you or you haven’t accessed my pdf after all?
It could be some kind of mistake was done aggregating the data on that site. I don’t know.