Daniel Vision vs Constantine the Great

[mms20102]

Across my Biblical studies in the old testament there is a chapter named Daniel and this chapter has some visions that's supposed to represent the future events to come and in most of the time those visions are represented in real Historic facts, in this post I would like to discuss the vision of Daniel 7 https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Daniel-Chapter-7/
So I will make 4 main points in this post:

1- The 4 beasts
2- The 10 horns
3- The small horn
4- The time after the small horn

First point is the 4 beasts no one will had different interpretation of the beasts other than the 4 empires, 1- Babylon 2- Persian 3- Greek 4- Roman

Second point is the 10 horns.

23-Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

24-And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

The Hakham Saadia Gaon said in his Book
The ten could be :
1- The greatest emperors.
2- The greatest fathers ( The earliest Emperors )
3- The greatest one of each family.
If we take any of the above conditions only 10 emperors will remain.

In my opinion they are the 10 emperors that conquered Jerusalem and killed both monotheists and Trinitarians and they are ten starting from Nero up to Diocletian 305 not just my humble opinion but also the opinion of many Christian theologians.

Now the small Horn

24 - and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

The small horn here should be also an emperor from the Romans and after 10 emperors and he shall conquer three and say great things against God and will be different from those 10 and the one matching the vision is Constantine the Great.
Constantine the Great in 313 made the Edict of Milan which declared tolerance for Christianity in the Roman Empire, he began to favor Christianity beginning in 312, finally becoming a Christian and being baptised by either Eusebius of Nicomedia an Arian bishop or Pope Saint Sylvester which is maintained by the Catholic Church and the Coptic Orthodox Church. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great).
he eliminated 3 emperors

In his book History of Christian Church, Philip Schaff mentioned

With his every victory, over his pagan rivals, Galerius, Maxentius, and Licinius, his personal leaning to Christianity and his confidence in the magic power of the sign of the cross increased; yet he did not formally renounce heathenism, and did not receive baptism until, in 337, he was laid upon the bed of his death

(https://worthychristianbooks.com/histor ... an-empire/)

The very brightest period of his reign is stained with gross crimes, which even the spirit of the age and the policy of an absolute monarch cannot excuse. After having reached, upon the bloody path of war, the goal of his ambition, the sole possession of the empire, yea, in the very year in which he summoned the great council of Nicaea, he ordered the execution of his conquered rival and brother-in-law, Licinius, in breach of a solemn promise of mercy (324). Not satisfied with this, he caused soon afterwards, from political suspicion, the death of the young Licinius, his nephew, a boy of hardly eleven years. But the worst of all is the murder of his eldest son, Crispus, in 326

Also in their book (The Complete Book of When and Where) E. Michael Rusten · Sharon O. Rusten wrote

But there was a darker side to Constantine. In 326, he had his wife, the sister of Maxentius, and one son executed under suspicious circumstances. He also never relinquished his position as chief priest of the pagan state religion, and his coins proclaimed his allegiance to the sun god. He delayed Christian baptism until shortly before his death.

https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/m ... nstantine/

His conversion was not accompanied by a sharp break with his former paganism. Rather, a transition is discernible from the worship of the divine Sun to the service of the one true Christian God. When, in 321, he made the first day of the week a holiday, he described it as the day of the sun (but so do Christians today!).

https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/m ... rly-church

What Constantine did about Christmas further suggests he had Christianity in mind. Early Christians, of course, had no information that would help the, calculate the date of Christ's birth. The earliest evidence for the observance of December 25 as the birthday of Christ appears in the Philocalian Calendar, composed at Rome in 336. For many years this date was observed only in the west ; the eastern churchs observed Jan 6, Epiphany. Curiously, pagan holidays lay behind both of these dates. December 25 was the Natalis Soli Invicti, the birthday of the Unconquered Sun. Jan 6 was the feast of Dionysus.

so regarding the quotations above we can say for sure the small horn is Constantine the Great

Now before going to 4th point we need to highlight some points
1- His converting to Christianity was political issue
2- He eliminated monotheists and declared trinitarians
3- He was never baptized until his death
4- He killed many of his family members
5- He mixed Christianity and paganism
6- He killed anyone owned Arian books


Now we move to point 4, the point that Christians ,Muslims and other theologians have interpreted differently

He will speak words against the Most High [God] and wear down the saints of the Most High, and he will intend to change the times and the law; and they will be given into his hand for a time, [two] times, and half a time [three and one-half years].

https://biblehub.com/daniel/7-25.htm

we need to ask first who ended the Ruling of Constantine and his followers, and the answer is clear, Muslims ended the ruling of Constantine and his followers over Jerusalem ( Kingdom of God). Constantine and his followers reigned over Jerusalem from 305 up 636 means 331 years which is by lunar years 640 and which is almost 3.5 portions of time ( 1 portion = 100 years )

This post was nothing but a personal view to the vision.

Edit Important note: -
Main researcher ( Ahmed Spea )
The post is a modified English version of the main research.

[GoldenCup]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #87]

QUESTION #1 What does the SEA beast /the SCARLET beast represent?

It represents Mystery Babylon the GREAT. This is the Great city which rules over the Kings of the Earth, just as the ancient Kingdom of BABYLON did when it was being used by GOD as a GOLDEN CUP in his hand; to bring punishment to the nations and the Kingdom of Judah, and bring all the surrounding peoples, nations, and tongues, under its rule & dominion.

QUESTION #2 If the SEA beast is presumed to be red because it is controlled by the Devil, is the EARTH beast not also red for the same reason?

We're not told whether the earth beast is SCARLET/RED (a characteristic of the Dragon), but we are told that it SPEAKS AS A DRAGON (A characteristic of the Dragon). We must make the connections based on the similar characteristics found between the Dragon and the 2 Beasts.

[JehovahsWitness]

NOW MANY SEVEN HEADED BEASTS?

In John 17 we see a Harlot riding on the back of a beast. The beast has seven heads, ten horns and is scarlet in colour. If we accept she is not riding the Dragon, there remain two possibilities


1. THE SEA BEAST
2. THE IMAGE OF THE SEA BEAST


THE IMAGE OF THE SEA BEAST


REVELATION 17

3 I saw that one of its heads seemed to have been fatally wounded, but its mortal wound had been healed, and all the earth followed the wild beast with admiration. 4

Here we learn that the SEA BEAST suffered a near fatal wound; John calls the sea beast "The first beast"

11 Then I saw another wild beast ascending out of the earth, and it had two horns like a lamb, but it began speaking like a dragon.+ 12 It exercises all the authority of the first wild beast in its sight. And it makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first wild beast, whose mortal wound was healed ...

Nos notice what the earth beast goes on to do...

14 It misleads those who dwell on the earth, because of the signs that it was permitted to perform in the sight of the wild beast, while it tells those who dwell on the earth to make an image+ to the wild beast that had the sword-stroke and yet revived.+ 15 And it was permitted to give breath to the image of the wild beast, so that the image of the wild beast should both speak and cause to be killed all those who refuse to worship the image of the wild beast.

An IMAGE :
1.
a representation of the external form of a person or thing in art

So we now have an IMAGE* of the SEA BEAST ("wild beast that had the sword-stroke "). Since it is an image we can reasonably assume it looks like the "original" (with 7 heads and ten horns). Even if we disregard the possibility the image of the sea beast ressembling the sea beast, we still have a SECOND BEAST that exercises considerable power and could well be the Harlot's ride.

CONCLUSION

By the end of chapter 13 of Revelation we have TWO BEASTS the sea beast and {quote} "the image of the wild beast". We don't know for sure what colour they are, but the SEA BEAST , is spoken of as being "like a leopard". The Harlot is riding on one of these two beasts

RELATED POSTS

What are the differences between the SEA beast and the SCARLET BEAST?
viewtopic.php?p=1151625#p1151625

[GoldenCup]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #92]

I understand your perspective and position on this. Thanks for sharing the images. When does the harlot ride the Beast? When the Crowns are on the Horns or when the crowns are on the heads?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #92]

I understand your perspective and position on this. ...

Good. So would it be fair to say, at the very least, you have actually missed an entire BEAST? You are not alone, a lot of people have not read Revelation close enough and overlooked the "image" beast. Now either the IMAGE BEAST is created, given considerable power and bows out entirely from the narrative or it is indeed referenced elsewhere in the book of Revelation before it is destroyed.

REVELATION 14:11

11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever,+ and day and night they have no rest, those who worship the wild beast --->and< ---- ITS IMAGE and whoever receives the mark of its name

HOW can the image of the wild beast be destroyed if it never existed?

14 It misleads those who dwell on the earth, because of the signs that it was permitted to perform in the sight of the wild beast, while it tells those who dwell on the earth to make an image+ to the wild beast that had the sword-stroke and yet revived.+ 15 And it was permitted to give breath to the image of the wild beast, so that the image of the wild beast should both speak and cause to be killed all those who refuse to worship the image of the wild beast.

An IMAGE :
1.
a representation of the external form of a person or thing in art

[GoldenCup]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #94]

You are very welcome; so would it be fair to say, at the very least, you have actually missed an entire BEAST?

That's not what I implied in my post, but just wanted to thank you for taking the time to share your theory and for making your position clear with images etc. I find your theory interesting & will definitely consider it. I will need to study it deeper in order to convince myself one way or the other.

For starters, and to confirm, Does the Harlot only ride the IMAGE OF THE BEAST (SCARLET BEAST OF REV.17) and not the SEA BEAST of Rev. 13?

Secondly, when does the Harlot ride the image of the Beast? When the Crowns are on the Heads, or when the crowns are on the Horns?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #94]

You are very welcome; so would it be fair to say, at the very least, you have actually missed an entire BEAST?

That's not what I implied in my post...

I didnt say you did, but thats what I'm implying in mine.

Your mistakes seem to be, as in the case with the leopard reference of the SEA BEAST , if a passage is problematic to your conjecture you literally don't address it (ignoring any attempt to get you to even mention it). So far I have asked you about the leopard element several times. You refuse to admit there is a THIRD beast* , or if you do you refuse to acknowledge the POSSIBILITY it might be mention elsewhere in the narrative (more on this to come)

If our theories become dearer to us than the truth, growth becomes difficult.

THE DRAGON

1. THE SEA BEAST
2. THE EARTH BEAST
3. THE IMAGE BEAST



JW

[GoldenCup]

Your mistakes seem to be, as in the case with the leopard reference of the SES BEAST , if a passage is problematic to your conjecture you literally don't address it (ignoring any attempt to get you to even mention it). You refuse to admit there is a THIRD beast* , or if you do you refuse to acknowledge the POSSIBILITY it might be mention elsewhere in the narrative (more on this to come)

Let us not veer of the track. I stated that I find your theory interesting and am considering it.. I asked 2 questions that will help me in getting closer to proving or disproving your theory. Please answer them.

Thanks.

[JehovahsWitness]

Your mistakes seem to be, as in the case with the leopard reference of the SES BEAST , if a passage is problematic to your conjecture you literally don't address it (ignoring any attempt to get you to even mention it). You refuse to admit there is a THIRD beast* , or if you do you refuse to acknowledge the POSSIBILITY it might be mention elsewhere in the narrative (more on this to come)

Let us not veer of the track.

I don't veer (I think you may be starting to understand how focused I can be), You posted some pretty scathing accusations as regard to my post about the existence of the IMAGE BEAST and its colour and I am responding to that.

I may possibly respond to any addition questions if I feel they are relevant (just as I presume YOU will address the LEOPARD reference in your own sweet time).

[GoldenCup]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #96]

So far I have asked you about the leopard element several times. You refuse to admit there is a THIRD beast*

I thought I made it clear in one of my previous posts that there was no need for John to mention the physical form of the beast a 2nd time in Rev. 17, since he already mentioned those aspects of the beast in Rev. 13... What we do get in Rev. 17 is MORE DETAIL: THE COLOR OF THE BEAST but no mention of the physical form. Why? Because it's understood to be the SAME BEAST.

That's why we only get the details of its physical form in Rev. 13: Body of Leopard, Feet of Bear, Mouth of Lion; and subsequently get the color fo the same beast in Rev.17: SCARLET without ANY MENTION of its physical attributes other than its 7 HEADS & 10 HORNS. This shows we're talking about the SAME BEAST in both visions.

You want to speculate that a specific attribute of the physical form of the beast having BODY OF A LEOPARD, means that the beast must also have the COLOR of a leopard, but that's NOT what the text is describing. That is your highly speculative assumption.

I still haven't been convinced or believe that there are 3 beasts apart from the Dragon, ONLY TWO. The Sea and Earth beast, and the Sea beast being scarlet red like the dragon that gave him its power, throne, and authority.

Earlier you asked a question that got me thinking.... Could it be that the Dragon and the Sea Beast are the SAME entity? So the Dragon and the sea beast have been merged into one, and that's why the sea beast has the color of scarlet?

Or another alternate theory, that the beast has become RED from drinking the blood of the Saints with the Harlot?

These last two theories are just recent thoughts of mine that came up throughout this discussion...

[JehovahsWitness]

I thought I made it clear in one of my previous posts that there was no need for John to mention the physical form of the beast a 2nd time in Rev. 17,

I dont see that as being relevant since the appearance of the SEA BEAST is mentioned when it first appeared (recorded in Revelation CHAPTER 13).

JOHN does not say it had "The body of a leopard" he says it was "like" a leopard. Since he does not say more we can make no assumptions one way or then other. However, an honest bible reading has to accept, there is the POSSIBILITY John might have been referring to its skin pattern and / or colour.

... subsequently get the color fo the same beast in Rev.17

It is an unproven assumption that Rev 17 is the sea beast. I am not interested in you speculations, assumptions or conjecture.