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 #100]

However, an honest bible reading has to accept, there is the POSSIBILITY John might have been referring to its skin pattern and / or colour.

But this assumption is far less probable when considering what I previously mentioned. It seems far more probable to conclude that the sea beast and scarlet beast of Rev. 13 & 17, are simply two visions of the same beast that show different details, while also describing many similarities. Could I be wrong? Maybe. Could you be wrong? Well, that's what we're going to find out once you answer the two previous questions I asked.

No rush, take all the time you need.

Good night.

[JehovahsWitness]

But this assumption is far less probable when considering what I previously mentioned.

Your assumption is based on the following three points ...

(a) both are controlled by the Devil (so you falsely it must be red)
(b) both have 7 heads / 10 horns (similarity of characteristics)
(c) both have blasphemous (similarity of characteristics)

I asked you if there was anything else and your silence indicates that the above three points is all you are basing your assumption on. So let's DEBUNK the above ...

(a) There is absolutely no indication in Revelation that that which comes from or is controlled by the Devil must be red. This is an ad hoc rule: there are several things that originate from or is controlled by the Devil (including the LAND BEAST/ frogs... even a river if water) and at no point does John indicate they are RED. Your point (a) mere conjecture totally unfounded in scripture. DISMISSED

So now you do not have three points , you have TWO points, but these, at least, have some basis in scripture ....

[JehovahsWitness]

DOES THE FACT THAT THE SEA BEAST AND THE SCARLET BEAST SHARED CHARACTERISTICS MEAN THEY MUST BE ONE AND THE SAME CREATURE?

This might have been a reasonable assumption if the sea beast was the ONLY beast that could lay claim to such characteristics.

However, Revelation chapter 13 presented us with a THIRD beast , namely the IMAGE BEAST. (For evidence that there is in fact a third beast that mirrors or is a replica/image of the Sea beast see post #92 and post #94)

If we stay faithful to to the text, it is an irrefutable fact that the woman of CHAPTER 17 could be riding on either the sea beast OR the image beast, both of which would logically have 7 heads, ten horns and blasphemous names!

.



JW

[JehovahsWitness]

SPOT THE DIFFERENCE !

Look very closely at the two images in the picture: can you spot the difference?



ANSWER: The scarlet beast has no crowns*! Yes while similar, the sea beast and the scarlet beast are not exactly the same!

The image of the beast is a an instrument created and employed to get humanity to worship the SEA BEAST (compare Rev 13 :12) ; as such its very purpose it to direct attention to , not to itself (which would be the case if the scarlet beast was simply a different manifestation of the SEA BEAST) but to the original after which it was modeled.

Just as an idol, is inferior to the god it represents, the SCARLET BEAST is distinguishable as inferior to the SEA BEAST by its lack of royal headwear*.

CONCLUSION Unless one argues that the differences are there to signal the two beasts are the same, (which is a bit like a man sleeping with his sister-in-law becaause she has a strong ressemblance to his wife) it seems obvious the differences are there to signal a different beast. The only beast that can possibly fit the description is ... THE IMAGE BEAST


* The DRAGON has crowns - The SEA BEAST has crowns but the SCARLET BEAST /THE IMAGE OF THE BEAST has no crowns to signal it is just an "animated" image not "the real thing". The scarlet beast has no integral souvereignty, the SEA BEAST on the other hand has inferred (recieved) souvereignty. (The Dragon is "The ruler / prince of the wordl" (John 14:30) whose power is external to the individual kingdoms he manipulates)

[JehovahsWitness]

WHO CARRIES THE HARLOT?

Since the woman is riding either the sea beast or its image, we can ask is there enough information provided by John to say which of the two she is in fact riding ?

One indication can be gleaned from John's style of writing: he consistently and faithfully describes what he sees, ie the physical characteristics of the what he is shown (compare Rev 1:19). This is especially true when presenting individuals, beast and creatures that do not exist in the physical realm. When we don't have the equivalent in the physical (he doesn't need to describe frogs or grapes or mountains) he uses simile or metaphor to try and paint an accutate picture.

The reason this is significant is for the SEA BEAST he gave a description of its physical characteristics in Revelation 13, (for more on this point see post #88 ) , but for its IMAGE he only describes its origins in that chapter. So while we can draw some reasonable conclusions from the fact that it is an image of the original, there is no actual description in chapter 13 of the IMAGE BEAST's appearance. We learn its origin, fonction and powers, but John offers no detailled description.

To argue that the beast of Revelation 17 is the SEA BEAST is to argue John fails to describe the appearance anywhere of the IMAGE BEAST, a conclusion wholly out of harmony with his narrative.

Further, which is more likely , that John breaks with pattern and describes the appearance of the same beast a SECOND time* or...He is remains consistent fournishing us with description of a beast he introduced earlier but not described?

Another anomaly (if John was later describing the SEA BEAST for the second time in Chapter 13) is, why he chooses to repeat the number of heads, to repeat the number of horns, to repeat the blasphemous signs...but initially to make no mention of the colour (scarlet).

The argument that the colour is the ONLY element not worth mentioning (because its obviously red it being a creation of the red devil) is DEBUNKED not only because it is far from evident ( see post #102 above ), but because if it was obvious and unworthy of mention in chapter 13, why does it suddenly become less obvious and worthy of mention in chapter 17?

CONCLUSION It is likely John is offering his first description of the IMAGE BEAST because, John arguably does not repeat his descriptions of physical characteristics of the beasts, it would be inconsistent for John to fail to mention a key feature explicitly while repeating others, and if he were describing the sea beast transformed that would leave revelation without a description of the image beast. It is therefore reasonable to conclude the woman is riding not the sea beast but the IMAGE BEAST.

[JehovahsWitness]

How does John describe the SEA BEAST ?
viewtopic.php?p=1151669#p1151669

Should de assume the SEA BEAST is RED because it is ultimately controlled by the Devil ?
viewtopic.php?p=1151700#p1151700

Is there really a second 7-headed wild beast in Revelation chapter 13?
viewtopic.php?p=1151676#p1151676

Why do the descriptions of the BEASTS in Rev 13 and Rev 17 share certain characteristics?
viewtopic.php?p=1151702#p1151702

Do the descriptions of the BEASTS in Rev 13 and Rev 17 correspond? [CROWNS]
viewtopic.php?p=1151704#p1151704

Does the narrative indicate which beast the harlot is riding in Revelation chapter 17?
viewtopic.php?p=1151708#p1151708

What do the HARLOT and THE SCARLET BEAST of Revelation chapter 17 represent?
viewtopic.php?p=1151609#p1151609

To learn more please go to other posts related to

DANIEL'S PROPHECIES , .THE SECOND COMING * and ... THE BOOK OF REVELATION

*The Return of Christ

[GoldenCup]

The reason this is significant is for the SEA BEAST he gave a description of its physical characteristics in Revelation 13, but for its IMAGE he only describes its origins in that chapter. So while de can draw some reasonable conclusions from the fact that it is an image of the original, there is no actual description in chapter 13 of the IMAGE BEAST's appearance.

Since there's no physical description of the Scarlet beast, that links it back to the Sea Beasts' "Likeness of a Leopard," it's impossible to prove your theory that the Scarlet beast is an IMAGE of the Sea beast (based on speculating the change in color from yellow to scarlet). We need the physical description of the Scarlet beast in order to prove that its indeed an IMAGE of it. Without those details all you're left with is conjecture and speculation. Without the physical description for the Scarlet beast, there's no way of proving that it has the likeness of a Leopard, like the sea beast before it, and therefore no way to be able to say that its leopard descrption was PREVIOUSLY YELLOW, BUT NOW IT'S SCARLET RED, AND thereby conclude that it MUST BE THE IMAGE of the Sea beast.

The fact that there's no mention of the scarlet beast having the likeness of a Leopard, or the feet of a bear, or the mouth of a lion, that would link it back to the Sea beast, proves that your theory that a CHANGE IN COLOR proves its an image of the Sea beast, is nothing more than speculative assumptions with no real evidence to prove it.

Also, I believe I found the nail in the coffin for your theory. The Harlot of Rev. 17 rides the Scarlet beast which is the IMAGE of the previous SEA beast according to your position. The previous sea beast has the crowns on the horns, meaning the 10 Kings have been given Kingly authority with the Sea beast. It's not UNTIL the 10 Horns are crowned, that these same 10 Kings (along with the beast) TURN against the Harlot to destroy her. So the THE HARLOT IS DESTROYED WHEN THE 10 KINGS ARE CROWNED. Proving that your theory that the Harlot sits on the IMAGE of the beast (which supposedly comes AFTER the Sea beast w/10 horns crowned) is impossible because she's DESTROYED when the crowns are on the horns, NOT AFTER.

I think this conclusively proves my theory that the Sea Beast and Scarlet beast are one and the same. If this is correct, then I would also conclude that the vision of Chapter 17 when the Harlot rides the Scarlet beast, shows an earlier event that HAPPENS PRIOR TO the 10 Horns being Crowned, namely: when the HARLOT RIDES THE SEA BEAST FOR THE FIRST TIME.

I'm sure you know that the book of revelation is a series of visions that aren't all in chronological linear order. John was given different perspectives and timeframes of the same story like pieces to a puzzle. We must piece them together correctly by connecting the clues.

[JehovahsWitness]

Since there's no physical description of the Scarlet beast, that links it back to the Sea Beasts' "Likeness of a Leopard," it's impossible to prove your theory that the Scarlet beast is an IMAGE of the Sea beast (based on speculating the change in color from yellow to scarlet).

Already addressed --> see post #105

[JehovahsWitness]

We need the physical description of the Scarlet beast in order to prove that its indeed an IMAGE of it.

We have a description of the scarlet beast ; what we de dont have is is an initial description of the IMAGE beast. This point is addressed --> see post #105

Without the physical description for the Scarlet beast, there's no way of proving that it has the likeness of a Leopard ...

This point is addressed --> see post #92

[JehovahsWitness]

The ... sea beast has the crowns on the horns, ... [scarlet beast has no crowns]

This point is addressed --> see post #104

...your theory that a CHANGE IN COLOR

I have presented no theory of "a change in colour" ; please re-read --> post #106






==================================================================

The fact that there's no mention of the scarlet beast having the likeness of a Leopard, or the feet of a bear, or the mouth of a lion, that would link it back to the Sea beast proves that your theory [ ... ]is nothing more than speculative assumptions with no real evidence to prove it.

The scarlet colored beast is the same as the SEA beast NOT different.

NOTE : For An OVERVIEW and rundown of the key players and events of REVELATION CHAPTERS 13 &17 see KEY: post --> # 129 )