tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15397617427901789372024-03-13T05:22:27.918-07:00ThoughtLinesA collection of articles and documents of biblical interestKen LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.comBlogger132125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-55879362422025616772022-02-25T12:44:00.002-08:002022-02-25T12:54:41.042-08:00"His Judgment" in Revelation 14:7<p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><span 0="" 13px="" arial="" caret-color:="" font-family:="" font-size:="" helvetica="" rgb="">It has become popular to think of the judgment as a judgment of God</span></span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">—</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">one in which God is on trial. That view has often been read into the expression "his judgment" in Revelation 14:7.</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The Greek word used for “judgment” in Revelation 14:7 is<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>krísis</i>, the primary definition of which is:</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><b>1</b>.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>judging, judgment</i>—<b>a</b>. of the activity of God or the Messiah as judge, esp. on the Last Day” (<i>A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>by Arndt and Gingrich, p. 453).</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>SDA Bible Commentary</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>on Revelation 14:7 has this to say about the word “judgment” as used in that verse: “Gr.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>krisis</i>, 'the act of judging,’ contrasted with <i>krima</i>, ‘the sentence of judgment’.”</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">We find the same word in John 5:27 where Jesus claims "authority to execute judgment.” It means to<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>“act as judge”</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(Arndt and Gingrich, p. 453).</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">The lexicon actually cites Revelation 14:7 as a typical example of this word, and translates the phrase in question as: “</span><i style="font-family: helvetica;">the hour when he is to judge</i><span class="Apple-converted-space" style="font-family: helvetica;"> </span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Rv 14:7” (Ibid.).</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">So it is clear that God is the one doing the judging in this verse.</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">“<i>Krisis</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>may indicate either the act of investigating a case or the act of carrying out the sentence” (<i>SDA Bible Commentary,</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Vol. 7, p. 849).</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Revelation 14:7 is clearly talking about the investigative judgment (as opposed to the later judgment of the wicked) because it says that it “<i>is</i><span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>come” (present tense in the context of the proclamation of the first angel’s message).</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">To find out what the investigative judgment is all about, we can read the chapter “Facing Life’s Record” in<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span><i>The Great Controversy</i>. The whole chapter describes this judgment. It can be summarized in the second paragraph of the chapter:</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">"Thus was presented to the prophet's vision the great and solemn day when the characters and the lives of men should pass in review before the Judge of all the earth, and to every man should be rendered 'according to his works.' The Ancient of Days is God the Father. Says the psalmist: 'Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God.' <span class="egwlink egwlink_bible" data-link="1965.31350">Psalm 90:2</span>. It is He, the source of all being, and the fountain of all law, that is to preside in the judgment. And holy angels as ministers and witnesses, in number 'ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands,' attend this great tribunal” (GC 479).</span></p><p style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-align: left; text-size-adjust: auto;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">It is very clear</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">—from the language used in the text, and also from <i>The Great Controversy</i></span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">—</span><span style="font-family: helvetica;">that Revelation 14:7 is not about God <i>being</i> judged, but rather that <i>mankind </i>is being judged <i>by </i>God.</span></p>Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-89086311937518877822021-10-09T15:51:00.002-07:002021-10-09T16:06:12.211-07:00Answering Objections to the Literal View of Daniel 11:40-45When I first read Uriah Smith's explanation of the last part of Daniel 11, I thought it was weird. Why would the Bible be talking about Turkey? I liked Smith's comments about most of Daniel and Revelation. But here, I felt, he got off on the wrong track somewhere. I just couldn't see what Turkey had to do with anything.<div><br /></div><div>And that is how most people I've talked with see it as well.</div><div><br /></div><div>Since then I have been able to study the subject thoroughly from all sides. And guess what? After carefully evaluating each of the other major approaches to Daniel 11, the view that makes the most sense to me now is Uriah Smith's explanation.</div><div><br /></div><div>I think most people are like I was. The main reason they discount the pioneer view is because they haven't openly and objectively considered all the evidence.</div><div><br /></div><div>In <a href="http://www.thoughtlines.org/2015/08/daniel-11.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #2b00fe;">previous posts</span></a> I have shared a lot about Daniel 11 and explained how the literal view of the chapter fits the historical record perfectly. In this post I am directing you to the paper I have prepared for this year's Daniel 11 conference in Berrien Springs, Michigan. In it I answer seven common objections to the pioneer view. You'll find the paper posted at <a href="http://www.daniel11prophecy.com/uploads/1/1/3/7/113721993/elder_ken_lebrun_paper.pdf" target="_blank"><span style="color: #2b00fe;">http://www.Daniel11prophecy.com</span></a> under the 2021 Conference Papers.</div>Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-34369841804176168192021-07-23T09:29:00.017-07:002021-09-01T08:39:48.819-07:00Who Was Zerubbabel's Grandfather?<p> <span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px;">“And again the word of the Lord came unto Haggai in the four and twentieth day of the month, saying, Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I will shake the heavens and the earth; And I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms, and I will destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the heathen; and I will overthrow the chariots, and those that ride in them; and the horses and their riders shall come down, every one by the sword of his brother. In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, will I take thee, O Zerubbabel, my servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith the Lord, and will make thee as a signet: for I have chosen thee, saith the Lord of hosts.” Haggai 2:20-23.</span></p><p>Zerubbabel and his father Shealtiel (Salathiel) are the only two individuals found in both Matthew's and Luke's genealogy of Jesus between David and Joseph the husband of Mary. Apart from those two, every other name listed within that span is different in the two gospel accounts. See <a href="http://www.thoughtlines.org/2021/07/human-ancestry-of-jesus.html" target="_blank"><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Human Ancestry of Jesus</span></a> for more on that.</p><p>Zerubbabel is an important character. He was the governor of Judah for over twenty years, supervising the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem. The prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah were given to encourage him and Joshua the high priest in that important work. Haggai's messages to him personally have Messianic overtones, for their ultimate fulfillment would be realized in Zerubbabel's descendant, Jesus.</p><p>The question we are addressing here has to do with the differences in the biblical accounts of Zerubbabel's ancestry. 1 Chronicles 3:17-19; Matthew 1:12; and Luke 3:27 each give a different story.</p><p class="p2" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 14px;"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-M4rsGUNVLyo/YS-MgnbyrPI/AAAAAAAABao/Xall0idgEs4_ff57IbKjwY65whJt2ty5QCLcBGAsYHQ/s1920/Zerubbabel.010.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" height="180" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-M4rsGUNVLyo/YS-MgnbyrPI/AAAAAAAABao/Xall0idgEs4_ff57IbKjwY65whJt2ty5QCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Zerubbabel.010.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div><p class="p2" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 14px;"><br /></p>The identity of Zerubbabel's father seems to clear. Ezra, Haggai, Matthew, and Luke all agree that Shealtiel (Salathiel) was Zerubbabel's father. Only the Hebrew text of 1 Chronicles lists Pedaiah as his father. The Greek Septuagint of 1 Chronicles lists Shealtiel as his father.<p>Jehoiachin (Jeconiah), who reigned as king in Judah for only three months and ten days, was taken to Babylon in 597 BC with the prophet Ezekiel and 10,000 other captives. He had a number of children, but none of them would ever reign as king (Jeremiah 22:30).</p><p>Our question is, was Shealtiel the son of Jehoiachin or the son of Neri? A number of possible explanations have been proposed. Shealtiel might have been the actual son of Neri (Luke 3:27), but the son of Jehoiachin (Matthew 1:12) by adoption. Or, if Jehoiachin's natural sons had all died, Jehoiachin might have chosen Shealtiel, the son of Neri, as his legal heir and successor. One other possibility is that Shealtiel was Jehoiachin's grandson--that Jehoiachin's daughter married Neri, and that Shealtiel was their son. With any one of these explanations, both Matthew's and Luke's accounts would be correct according to Jewish custom. Matthew, showing Jesus as a legal heir to Judah's throne, and Luke, possibly showing Jesus' actual blood line, are both correct.</p>Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-43629609061109851742021-07-22T08:38:00.005-07:002021-09-01T08:26:14.882-07:00Human Ancestry of Jesus<p>The Bible uses two different approaches to the family line of Jesus. The list given in Matthew Chapter 1 is almost entirely different from the list in Luke Chapter 3. Here is a suggested explanation for that difference:</p><p>Matthew's list is obviously incomplete. For example, Matthew 1:11 says, "Josias (Josiah) begat Jechonias (Jehoiachin)." In reality Jehoiachin was Josiah's grandson. Matthew's purpose was not to list every single link in the genealogy, but rather simply to present enough of the line to demonstrate that Jesus was in fact descended from David and from Abraham (verse 1). In Matthew 1:17 he says, "So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations." This doesn't have to mean that that is all the generations that there were, but simply that that is all the generations he was listing to establish Christ's legitimacy as King of Israel.</p><p>Whereas Matthew shows Jesus to have descended through the line of Judah's kings via Solomon, Luke's list presents Jesus as having descended through Nathan, another son of David and Bathsheba. I favor the explanation that suggests Luke is presenting the literal blood line of Jesus through Mary, and that Matthew is showing Jesus' legally recognized patriarchal line through Joseph. Both lines go through David. It appears that Mary's husband Joseph was the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16), and that Heli (Luke 3:23) could have been Mary's father. If Mary was Heli's only child, Joseph would have become Heli's legal heir by marrying her. According to this explanation, Luke's account shows how Jesus was an actual blood descendant of David through Mary, and Matthew's account shows that Jesus was the legal heir of Judah's royal line though his adoption by Joseph.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RPYgAP5KcRY/YS-bWMtQWyI/AAAAAAAABaw/JagFpt_6lHg-SdCm6jXDqQrKG_WUCiS9gCLcBGAsYHQ/s1920/Zerubbabel.013.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1080" data-original-width="1920" height="180" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RPYgAP5KcRY/YS-bWMtQWyI/AAAAAAAABaw/JagFpt_6lHg-SdCm6jXDqQrKG_WUCiS9gCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Zerubbabel.013.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div><p>Luke 3:23 in the Greek doesn't actually say that Joseph was the son of Heli. The words "the son" in the KJV are italicized, indicating they were supplied by the translators. The Greek literally says, "And Jesus Himself was beginning to be about thirty years old, being, as was supposed, son of Joseph, of Heli." It was supposed that Jesus was the son of Joseph, but really he was "of Heli."</p><p>This is consistent with the fact that Matthew tells the story of Jesus' birth from Joseph's perspective, while Luke tells Mary's story. And in Matthew's account, when the angel appears to Joseph in a dream he addresses him as "Joseph, thou son of David" (Matthew 1:20). The genealogy in the first seventeen verses was given to show how that is so.</p><p>Luke tells us that Mary was a relative of Elizabeth (Luke 1:36) who was descended from Aaron (verse 5). It is possible that Mary's father was of the tribe of Judah and that her mother was of the tribe of Levi. In that way, Jesus could be the blood descendant of David through His maternal grandfather, and Mary could still be related to Elisabeth on her mother's side.</p>Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-81319053569292059182021-02-11T08:39:00.004-08:002021-02-11T09:59:46.517-08:00God's Covenant With IsraelIn Jeremiah 31, God makes promises to Israel in unconditional language. This is the new covenant passage that is quoted twice in the book of Hebrews. This covenant is made "with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah." Jeremiah 31:31.<div><br /></div><div>God's unconditional commitment to Israel is brought out in verses 35-37. Speaking of the sun, the moon, and the stars, God says, "If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever." Then He says, "If heaven above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth searched out beneath, I will also cast off all the seed of Israel for all that they have done, saith the Lord."</div><div><br /></div><div>Some of God's promises to Israel were conditional upon their response to Him. But this passage makes it clear that His selection of them as His people is permanent, in spite of "all that they have done." Their behavior cannot change His choice of them as His covenant people.</div><div><br /></div><div>Popular "replacement theology" teaches that the Christian church replaces the Jewish nation as God's covenant people. But the Bible does not teach that. The Bible makes it clear that in order for Gentiles to experience the blessings of the new covenant they must be grafted into Israel. Not the modern nation of Israel, but the kingdom of David, for Jesus will sit on David's throne.</div><div><br /></div><div>For a more complete study of this subject see <a href="http://www.thoughtlines.org/2019/05/thy-people-and-remnant-of-israel.html" target="_blank">"<b>'Thy People' and the Remnant of Israel</b>"</a> posted on May 21, 2019.</div>Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-28222138433399416032019-10-03T13:41:00.000-07:002019-10-03T13:41:59.850-07:00Nations Are AngryBible prophecy foretold conflicts among the nations leading up to the second coming of Christ. Here is a chart placing some of those conflicts in relation to other prophetic events in Daniel and Revelation.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3dnhEelFxZw/XZZafJ3W1GI/AAAAAAAABJ4/PkOtkCJpfEsvpBYux9vlvaakUgPu47adQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/WoesChart%2Brevised.001.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="768" data-original-width="1024" height="300" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3dnhEelFxZw/XZZafJ3W1GI/AAAAAAAABJ4/PkOtkCJpfEsvpBYux9vlvaakUgPu47adQCLcBGAsYHQ/s400/WoesChart%2Brevised.001.jpeg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-52510491070208948832019-05-21T12:46:00.000-07:002019-09-08T16:19:18.574-07:00"Thy People" and the Remnant of IsraelGabriel’s reference to “thy people” throughout the book of Daniel consistently applies to the posterity of Jacob. The
expression in Daniel 12:1 does not refer to some other group. Christianity does not replace Israel in God’s plan; it renews and strengthens it.
<br />
<br />
To understand this better, read the article, <a href="https://www.thoughtlines.org/p/the-restoration-of-israel.html" target="_blank">"<b>The Restoration of Israel</b>"</a>.Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-58621840237015837082018-10-05T09:37:00.000-07:002018-10-05T09:38:52.053-07:00Daniel 11 ResourcesIn preparation for the <a href="http://www.daniel11prophecy.com/" target="_blank"><b>Daniel 11 Prophecy Conference</b></a> I want to make it easy for you to find all my material on Daniel 11. Just click <a href="http://www.thoughtlines.org/2015/08/daniel-11.html" target="_blank"><b>here</b></a> to be directed to my <a href="http://www.thoughtlines.org/2015/08/daniel-11.html" target="_blank"><b>August 24, 2015</b></a> post where I maintain an up-to-date index of everything on this site related to Daniel 11.Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-84252065861527104102018-10-04T12:05:00.001-07:002019-05-21T13:32:42.610-07:00Welcome to Thoughtlines.orgThat's right. You no longer need to type klebrun.blogspot.com. From now on all you have to do is type thougthlines.org into your browser. I don't know why I didn't realize I could assign a custom domain name to this blog. Anyway, I hope you appreciate it.<br />
<br />
There is a lot of information on this site. You can either click through all the archives listed by date on the right to see all the posts. Or you can search for a topic in the search bar at the top. Some of the searchable topics I've posted on include:<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">(These are not links. You'll need to enter these into the search bar. This post will show up in the search results also, because these labels are listed here.)</span><br />
Angels<br />
Ark of the Covenant<br />
Babylon<br />
Bible Readings<br />
Bible Study<br />
Book of Daniel<br />
Book of Revelation<br />
Chronology<br />
Covenant<br />
Creeds<br />
Crucifixion<br />
Daniel 11<br />
Doctrines<br />
Ellen White<br />
Family<br />
Festivals<br />
Gender<br />
Genealogy<br />
Gift of Prophecy<br />
Health<br />
Hermeneutics<br />
Israel<br />
Jesus<br />
Law of God<br />
Matthew 24<br />
New Light<br />
Ordination<br />
Organization<br />
Resurrection<br />
Revelation 9<br />
Revelation 17<br />
Rome<br />
Sabbath<br />
Salvation<br />
Satan<br />
Seven Seals<br />
Seven Trumpets<br />
Seventh-day Adventist Church<br />
Ten Commandments<br />
The Church<br />
The Closing Work<br />
The Daily<br />
The Great Controversy Issue<br />
The Judgment<br />
The Sealing<br />
Tribulation<br />
Worship<br />
1260 Days<br />
70 Years<br />
2520<br />
<br />
Some of the linked files in my blog posts are on a server that no longer allows public access. I apologize for that. I plan to get around to fixing that eventually. But in the meantime, if you click on a link and it doesn't take you there, let me know in the comments and I'll fix it for you.<br />
<br />
Happy Reading!Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-65123376073458590682018-09-17T13:37:00.000-07:002018-09-17T18:09:28.038-07:00Daniel 11:16<i>"But he that cometh against him shall do according to his own will, and none shall stand before him: and he shall stand in the glorious land, which by his hand shall be consumed."</i><br />
<br />
Most non-Adventist commentaries consider Daniel 11:16 to be a continuation of the narrative in verse 15, referring to Antiochus III the Great, who militarily wrested Palestine from Egyptian control. Adventists, on the other hand, have traditionally viewed verse 16 as the grand entrance of Rome into the prophecy by its defeat of the Seleucid kingdom. The expression "he that cometh" is applied to Rome, and the "him" against whom he comes is the Seleucid king.<br />
<br />
Counter to the mainstream Adventist interpretation, Dr. Roy Gane of Andrews University has pointed out several reasons for delaying Rome's introduction until verse 20. His work is cited in <a href="https://klebrun.blogspot.com/2018/08/testing-daniel-1116-22.html" target="_blank"><b>my last post</b></a>, where I provided fourteen reasons in favor of Dr. Gane's application of verses 17-22.<br />
<br />
In today's post, however, I will argue in favor of considering verse 16 to be a parenthetical preview describing Rome.<br />
<br />
It largely boils down to the correct identity of the first instance of the word "him" in the verse. As usual, the masculine singular personal pronoun is here indicated by a pronominal suffix attached to the Hebrew word for "against." This must necessarily refer back to a masculine singular antecedent. Several of the nouns in verse 15 are either feminine or plural, or both, eliminating them as grammatical candidates. Only through some sort of literary personification of the "south" in verse 15 is it possible to produce an antecedent that would allow one to apply the "him" to Egypt, which is necessary in order for "he that cometh" to be Antiochus.<br />
<br />
But an easier antecedent for the "him" is the word "king" in verse 15, which doesn't require us to jump through any literary hoops, for one would naturally assign to a king the masculine singular personal pronoun "him." This natural reading of the text favors the king of the North as the one being attacked in verse 16, rather than being the attacker.<br />
<br />
Those who feel that verse 16 describes Antiochus' conquests, on the other hand, would point out two considerations: (1) the lack of any clear textual break in the narrative after verse 15 that would allow us to transition to a new power, and (2) the literary parallels between verses 15 and 16, which would lead one to connect the two verses together in the narrative. Those parallels are significant:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-k3vG0wXtoKQ/W5_y9xXvOVI/AAAAAAAABCE/joD7kLIg1jkcMV6qlpCoXBCuvH5jG1b7ACLcBGAs/s1600/Screen%2BShot%2B2018-09-17%2Bat%2B11.29.56%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="156" data-original-width="423" height="118" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-k3vG0wXtoKQ/W5_y9xXvOVI/AAAAAAAABCE/joD7kLIg1jkcMV6qlpCoXBCuvH5jG1b7ACLcBGAs/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2018-09-17%2Bat%2B11.29.56%2BAM.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
It is clear, therefore, that verse 16 must be tied in some way to verse 15. Considering all the factors involved, I would like to suggest that the relationship of verse 16 to verse 15 is a relationship of comparison rather than of continuation. All that Antiochus the Great accomplished in verse 15 would be exceeded immensely by the power that comes against him. Verse 15 boasts that when Antiochus comes, "the arms of <i>the south</i> shall not withstand." But verse 16 presents the comparison, declaring that "<i>none</i> [nobody at all] shall stand before" the power that comes against Antiochus.<br />
<br />
Perhaps the best explanation for the lack of a major break or transition in the text after verse 15 is that Antiochus' story, in fact, does not end here; it only experiences a momentary interruption for a brief parenthetical comment for perspective. Yes, Antiochus did capture Judea. But he that cometh against him would do according to his own will, and none would stand before him. This new invader would also stand in the glorious land, which by his hand would indeed be consumed. This brief preview introduces Rome, a new power, into the prophecy, which would ultimately annihilate Jerusalem.<br />
<br />
While the merits of assigning verses 17-19 to Antiochus, chronicling the specific details of his downfall, are well substantiated, several factors support recognizing verse 16 as a snapshot preview of Rome's imminent takeover:<br />
<br />
1. The phrase, "shall do according to his own will," indicates that this power is not bound by any existing circumstances. The expression may appropriately be applied to the development of a new power on the prophetic stage, as William Shea has pointed out. <span style="color: #999999; font-size: x-small;"><i>Daniel: A Reader's Guide</i> (Nampa, ID: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 2005), 246.</span> Applied to the great empire builders Cyrus (Daniel 8:4) and Alexander the Great (Daniel 11:3), the phrase just doesn't seem to fit a struggling Seleucid who is about to surrender the prophetic spotlight over to another empire that is truly worthy of the expression.<br />
<br />
2. It is certainly not true that "none shall stand before" Antiochus III. For when he came into confrontation with Rome, Antiochus could not stand.<br />
<br />
3. As a result of conquering Palestine, Antiochus III did stand in the glorious land. But that is about as far as we can apply the verse to him. The word "consumed," meaning complete destruction or annihilation, is too strong of a word to describe Antiochus' relation to the glorious land. He was actually fairly gracious to the Jews.<br />
<br />
4. If nearly one fourth of the entire chapter, ten verses (verses 10-19) out of forty-five, involve the career of Antiochus III, that would assign to a single individual a stature without equal in Daniel 11 or elsewhere. Even Alexander the Great, the only prominent individual in Chapter 8, gets only two verses in Chapter 11. Ascribing the superlative declarations of verse 16 to Antiochus III places far too much relative emphasis on this insufficiently worthy individual.<br />
<br />
For these reasons, Rome fits the description of verse 16 much better.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-olk_v5D5Ns4/W5_-To1y-SI/AAAAAAAABCg/CqoYGa6XtukZgJSXAHbTeQ8qUB9HqVA0ACLcBGAs/s1600/A%2BNatural%2BReading%2Bof%2BDaniel%2B11.001.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="1" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-olk_v5D5Ns4/W5_-To1y-SI/AAAAAAAABCg/CqoYGa6XtukZgJSXAHbTeQ8qUB9HqVA0ACLcBGAs/s320/A%2BNatural%2BReading%2Bof%2BDaniel%2B11.001.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
But how it happened that this newly emerging empire in the West could end up stealing the prophetic spotlight from the successors of Alexander is a story that must be told. It was the activities of Antiochus III that lured the armies of Rome for the first time into Asia. Daniel 11:17-19 tells us all about it.<br />
<br />
After noting Antiochus' determination to expand his kingdom, verse 17 discusses the treaty he made with Ptolemy V of Egypt, pledging to him his daughter, Cleopatra I. After this, moving to reclaim the Thracian territory that his ancestor Seleucus I Nicator had conquered from Lysimachus, Antiochus turned "his face unto the isles" (verse 18), and crossed over into Europe. This alarmed the Romans, who in 191 BC declared war against him. Defeated at Thermopylae, Antiochus retreated to Ephesus. The Romans pursued, and the decisive battle was fought at Magnesia in 190 BC. The Seleucid army was vanquished. The result was that Antiochus had to surrender all of Asia west of the Taurus mountains, all of his war elephants, all but twelve warships, and agree to pay 15,000 talents, which involved an annual tribute, to Rome. Thus came to an inglorious end the great Seleucid Empire. In 187 BC Antiochus was murdered in his own homeland (verse 19) for robbing a temple to make his payment to Rome. He was the last Greek king of the North to appear in the prophecy.<br />
<br />
It is important to note that the rulers of Rome, which occupy the next ten verses (20-29), are never referred to as kings of the North. That's because their capital was in the West. From Rome they would control both the North and the South, but their identity was not to be found in either. They were of Rome, the stronghold from which they forecasted their devices (verse 24) lying beyond the dominions of Alexander's Diadochi. Rome was not the king of the North, but "he that cometh against him" (verse 16). Not until the Time of the End would the chapter's focus return to the East.<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #999999; font-size: x-small;">For an interesting account of the history of verses 17-19, see A. T. Jones, <i>The Great Empires of Prophecy</i>, Chapter 19, paragraphs 30-44.</span>Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-41955798583357986632018-08-30T11:58:00.003-07:002018-09-17T13:57:17.499-07:00Testing Daniel 11:16-22A little over a year ago I was introduced to Dr. Roy Gane's contribution to the study of Daniel 11:16-22. Since then, I have carefully compared his views with the traditional Adventist application of those verses. In this post I will share my analysis of it. For Dr. Gane's actual presentations, see:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>"The Un-Manifestation of Antiochus IV Epiphanes in Daniel 11:1-22," Roy E. Gane, presented at the Adventist Theological Society symposium on eschatology in 2007.</li>
<li>"Methodology for Interpretation of Daniel 11:2 - 12:3," Roy E. Gane, <i>Journal of the Adventist Theological Society</i>, 27/1-2: (2016): 294-343.</li>
<li><i>Andrews Study Bible</i> notes on Daniel 11:16-19.</li>
</ul>
<br />
The guiding principle that has most influenced my analysis of these verses is William Miller's 4th rule of prophetic interpretation:<br />
<br />
"To understand doctrine, bring all the scriptures together on the subject you wish to know; then let every word have its proper influence, and if you can form your theory without a contradiction, you cannot be in an error." <span style="font-size: x-small;">Joshua V. Himes, <i>Views of the Prophecies and Prophetic Chronology Selected From Manuscripts of William Miller With a Memoir of His Life</i> (Boston: Joshua V. Himes, 1841), 20.</span><br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span>
The part about "forming your theory without a contradiction," is what has most influenced my testing of Daniel 11:16-22. I have concluded that verse 16 must describe the introduction of Rome to the prophecy, as we have traditionally held. But for verses 17-22, I find Dr. Gane's application to be better. In <a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2018/09/daniel-1116.html" target="_blank"><b>my next post</b></a>, I will make the case for the introduction of Rome in verse 16 as we have traditionally done. But the compelling reasons for applying verses 17-19 to Antiochus III, as Dr. Gane does, rather than to Julius Caesar, as we have traditionally done, are summarized here.<br />
<br />
<ol>
<li>Not readily apparent in the KJV, verse 16 in the Hebrew is grammatically connected with verse 15. In the phrase “he that cometh against him” (verse 16), the “him” best refers to someone mentioned in the previous verse. Verse 15 describes Antiochus III about the year 200 BC, who would a decade later be defeated by Rome. Because of the connection between these two verses, it makes more sense for verse 16 to refer to Rome’s victory over Antiochus III at Magnesia, than it does to apply it to Rome's physical invasion of Syria 126 years later by Pompey. The real loss of Seleucid power occurred in 190 BC, not in 64 BC.</li>
<li>In verse 17, Julius Caesar did not “set his face” to enter by force the whole kingdom as Uriah Smith suggests. When Caesar went to Egypt, his intended purpose was to negotiate with Pompey and end the civil war between them. It was not for the purpose of taking over Egypt.</li>
<li>Smith explains how certain Jews were an aid to Caesar at this time, which is a good explanation of “upright ones with him” in verse 17. However, Antiochus III also had the Jews on his side in the alternative application of this verse.</li>
<li>“He shall give him” in verse 17 is problematic in Uriah Smith’s interpretation. From what I can tell, nobody gave Cleopatra to anybody.</li>
<li>“But she shall not stand on his side.” To be consistent, the context here should be Julius Caesar. But Cleopatra didn’t ever betray Caesar. So Smith explains it as Cleopatra later siding against Octavian, which is a little out of place in context.</li>
<li>Verse 18 starts out by saying, “After this.” In other words, after the last thing mentioned, which was Cleopatra not standing on Octavian’s side. But the interpretation given for the first part of this verse in Smith’s book is Caesar defeating Pharnaces of Pontus. This was not “after” Cleopatra sided against Octavian. So there is a problem there.</li>
<li>Smith offers no historical application of the last half of verse 18. But the alternative explanation offers a very good historical application.</li>
<li>Verse 19 says, “Then he shall turn his face toward the fort of his own land.” So all of verse 18 needs to have happened before he turns his face toward the fort of his own land. This rules out any application of the last part of verse 18 to anything that happened in Rome in connection with Caesar’s assassination. This leaves the last part of verse 18 without any historical fulfillment.</li>
<li>In verse 19 Caesar did stumble and fall in the fort of his own land, so this part matches him. But it also matches Antiochus III in the alternate view.</li>
<li>Augustus was “a raiser of taxes” (verse 20). The only problem here is that that seems to be a KJV wording that, while acceptable, is not the best translation of the Hebrew. The marginal reading shows the Hebrew meaning, which, while including the raising of taxes, is broader than that.</li>
<li>“In the glory of the kingdom” does fit the times of Augustus. But a literal translation of this verse says, “Then one will emerge in his stead who will cause a tribute-exacter of royal splendor to pass through.” So the glory or splendor does not necessarily refer to the times. It probably refers to the exacter himself.</li>
<li>Augustus did not die “within few days.” This is a major problem with this interpretation. He actually reigned as emperor 40 years, 7 months, and three days. No other emperor in Rome ever ruled that long.</li>
<li>“He shall be destroyed.” Augustus died of natural causes. He was not destroyed.</li>
<li>In verse 21, the phrase, “to whom they shall not give the honor of the kingdom” does not fit Tiberius at all. When Augustus died, there was no question but that Tiberius was the next emperor. There was actually no opposition at all to his assuming the position.</li>
</ol>
<br />
In contrast to this, there are no contradictions to be found in the application of verses 17-22 as Dr. Gane has proposed. It just fits.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tqph7jJIxUR2BwKFH2ME9qGaVBWl4cO4/view?usp=sharing" target="_blank">Side-by-Side Comparison of the Two Views</a><br />
<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-31182571825416295012018-07-20T09:20:00.000-07:002018-07-20T09:20:07.550-07:00Who is the King of the South?I have been invited to speak at the Daniel 11 Prophecy Conference to be held October 19-20, 2018 at the Village SDA Church in Berrien Springs, Michigan. Event information is at <a href="http://www.daniel11prophecy.com/" target="_blank">http://www.daniel11prophecy.com</a>.<br />
<br />
The stated purpose of this conference is "to provide a forum for the public hearing of the leading King of the South (KOS) interpretations of Daniel 11:40ff; to stimulate further study among church members on eschatological prophecy; and to raise awareness among church members of where we are in the broad flow of salvation history."<br />
<br />
While the focus of this conference is on the King of the South, that is just a convenient way of categorizing the views to be presented. Each speaker will present his position in the context of the broader interpretation of Daniel 11 as a whole.<br />
<br />
I will be speaking on Sabbath afternoon. The paper I will be presenting is entitled, "Identifying the King of the South Through a Natural Reading of Daniel 11." The full paper is posted under "Conference Papers" on the event website and is available now to read. <a href="http://www.daniel11prophecy.com/uploads/1/1/3/7/113721993/lebrun_paper.pdf" target="_blank">Click here to view and download</a>.<br />
<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-22002684176812858062017-09-26T08:30:00.000-07:002017-09-26T08:30:57.336-07:00Easy Street?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/aQ_8U1Gmg4Q/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aQ_8U1Gmg4Q?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-3828216044664016562017-07-04T14:02:00.002-07:002021-07-22T08:53:48.769-07:00Ancestry of Joash<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cnlYmcWNDtE/WVvvRLah0vI/AAAAAAAAA2E/TrQlR1hqMUkPYJLo4pjBrossDJ-LEVnZACLcBGAs/s1600/JoashAncestry.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="900" data-original-width="1600" height="180" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cnlYmcWNDtE/WVvvRLah0vI/AAAAAAAAA2E/TrQlR1hqMUkPYJLo4pjBrossDJ-LEVnZACLcBGAs/s320/JoashAncestry.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
David's royal line was preserved when Jehosheba hid the child Joash so that Athaliah the queen could not kill him.<br />
<br />
The marriage of Jehoshaphat's son to Ahab's daughter linked together the royal families of Israel and Judah. As a result, all the kings of Judah thereafter would be descended, not only from David, but from Ahab and Jezebel as well. And Matthew chapter 1 presents Jesus as an heir to that line of kings in Judah.<br />
<br />
The Bible does not say that Jehosheba was the daughter of Athaliah, but only that she was the daughter of Jehoram of Judah.<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-65990815966778813392017-02-27T12:24:00.000-08:002017-02-27T12:24:59.934-08:00Understanding the Judgment<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-M5dYpHPm8uo/WLSKLybyN9I/AAAAAAAAAwY/JrUjfcM9D4wUpFucLFr5Qf-9piHUDPuaACLcB/s1600/12%2BJudgment.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-M5dYpHPm8uo/WLSKLybyN9I/AAAAAAAAAwY/JrUjfcM9D4wUpFucLFr5Qf-9piHUDPuaACLcB/s320/12%2BJudgment.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-23898895859938116042017-02-04T17:25:00.000-08:002017-02-04T17:32:14.247-08:00Ark of the Covenant<div class="p1">
Statements by Ellen White on where the Ark of the Covenant is now and its eventual discovery:</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
“Before the temple was destroyed, God made known to a few of His faithful servants the fate of the temple…. These righteous men, just before the destruction of the temple, removed the sacred ark containing the tables of stone, and with mourning and sadness secreted it in a cave where it was to be hidden from the people of Israel because of their sins, and was to be no more restored to them. That sacred ark is yet hidden. It has never been disturbed since it was secreted.” <i>The Story of Redemption</i>, p. 195</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
“Among the righteous still in Jerusalem, to whom had been made plain the divine purpose, were some who determined to place beyond the reach of ruthless hands the sacred ark containing the tables of stone on which had been traced the precepts of the Decalogue. This they did. With mourning and sadness they secreted the ark in a cave, where it was to be hidden from the people of Israel and Judah because of their sins, and was to be no more restored to them. That sacred ark is yet hidden. It has never been disturbed since it was secreted.” <i>Prophets and Kings</i>, p. 453</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
“ ‘And He gave unto Moses, when He had made an end of communicating with him upon Mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written by the finger of God.’ Nothing written on those tables could be blotted out. The precious record of the law was placed in the ark of the testament and is still there, safely hidden from the human family. But in God’s appointed time He will bring forth these tables of stone to be a testimony to all the world against the disregard of His commandments and against the idolatrous worship of a counterfeit Sabbath.” MS 122, 1901; <i>SDA Bible Commentary</i>, Vol. 1, p. 1109</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
“There are abundant evidences of the immutability of God’s law. It was written with the finger of God, never to be obliterated, never to be destroyed. The tables of stone are hidden by God, to be produced in the great judgment-day, just as He wrote them.” <i>Review and Herald</i>, March 26, 1908; <i>SDA Bible Commentary</i>, Vol. 1, p. 1109</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
“When the judgment shall sit, and the books shall be opened, and every man shall be judged according to the things written in the books, then the tables of stone, hidden by God until that day, will be presented before the world as the standard of righteousness. Then men and women will see that the prerequisite of their salvation is obedience to the perfect law of God. None will find excuse for sin. By the righteous principles of that law, men will receive their sentence of life or of death.” <i>Review and Herald</i>, Jan. 28, 1909; <i>SDA Bible Commentary</i>, Vol. 1, p. 1109</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
“These tables of stone will be brought forth from their hiding place, and on them will be seen the Ten Commandments engraved by the finger of God. These tables of stone now lying in the Ark of the testimony will be a convincing testimony to the truth and binding claims of God’s law.” Letter 47, 1902.</div>
Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-83963848180807762022016-08-16T17:37:00.001-07:002023-08-15T11:34:55.024-07:00Ministry vs. Office<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVb9OP3e8yjd017JwiyVtYumxgyVG4ST9i-CmzWlhG-wBXf7QHMN4JoyhDwhLxumtxg0vVwkqXQeGdQ4x5dcFWTAM59AOqytjOUynEoTVFUqSMqTZWqRnb4bNuOdAzJGhwTK738J7TZh6GHtTwwtetB3cvuJCOjxj2srxe6JAqMSyf2UivWW5JucbWick/s3102/Anyone.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2113" data-original-width="3102" height="218" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVb9OP3e8yjd017JwiyVtYumxgyVG4ST9i-CmzWlhG-wBXf7QHMN4JoyhDwhLxumtxg0vVwkqXQeGdQ4x5dcFWTAM59AOqytjOUynEoTVFUqSMqTZWqRnb4bNuOdAzJGhwTK738J7TZh6GHtTwwtetB3cvuJCOjxj2srxe6JAqMSyf2UivWW5JucbWick/s320/Anyone.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />
Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-15990760920184640252016-08-08T18:34:00.002-07:002017-02-04T17:28:57.145-08:00Into the Looking Glass<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/sIiaXvAsgvo/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sIiaXvAsgvo?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div>
<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-1630366418379716032016-01-17T22:44:00.000-08:002016-01-18T09:00:48.610-08:00Seventy Years of Captivity<div class="MsoNormal">
Why did God, through Jeremiah, decree 70 years of Babylonian
captivity for His people, as Daniel learned in Daniel 9:2?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
According to Leviticus 26:34, 35 and 2 Chronicles 36:21, the
length of the captivity was to allow the land to enjoy all the sabbath-rest
years it had not been allowed during Israel’s years of apostasy.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
How many years of apostasy would it take to miss 70
sabbath-rest years? Every seventh year was to be a rest year for the land
(Leviticus 25:4). In addition, on every 50th year (Leviticus 25:10,
11), called the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">jubilee</i>, the land was
to rest as well. That 50th year was actually the first year of the
next 49-year cycle.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
With 8 sabbath-rest years (7 sabbatical years plus 1 jubilee
year) to be observed for every jubilee cycle of 49 years, it would
mathematically take at least 8.75 jubilee cycles, or 428.75 years, to
accumulate 70 sabbath-rest years. The period of apostasy would have to be fewer
than 434.875 years (which is 8.875 jubilee cycles), because that would produce
71 sabbath-rest years. So for them to have missed exactly 70 Sabbath-rest
years, their period of apostasy had to last somewhere in the range from 429 to
434 years.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Do we have a record of how many years of apostasy God’s
people experienced? We do. In Ezekiel 4:4-6, the prophet was told to
lie on his left side and bear the iniquity of the house of Israel 390 days.
Then he was to lie on his right side and bear the iniquity of the house of
Judah 40 days. “For I have laid upon thee the years of their iniquity” (v. 5).
“I have appointed thee each day for a year” (v. 6). Thus the total period of
the iniquity of Israel and Judah combined was 430 years. That would have
resulted in exactly 70 sabbath-rest years that they ignored. Those untaken years of rest were now
to be given to the land. God’s people would be exiled to Babylon for seventy
years (Jeremiah 25:11, 12; 29:10).<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This can be calculated in more than one way. For example,
the ratio of Sabbath-rest years to regular years (8 to 49) is 1 to 6.125. Apply
that ratio to the 430 years and round it to the nearest whole year:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>430 ÷ 6.125 = 70.2 = 70 years.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another way is to see the 8 sabbath-rest years
per 49-year jubilee cycle as 16.3265306% of the time. The formula would then
look like this: 430 x 0.163265306 = 70.2
= 70 years.</div>
Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-41667461550919872502015-12-07T15:51:00.000-08:002016-01-17T22:45:32.713-08:00Early Medo-Persian Bible ChronologyThe seventy years predicted by Jeremiah <span style="font-size: x-small;">(Jeremiah 25:11, 12; Jeremiah 29:10)</span> for the Babylonian captivity of the Jews extended from the taking of the first Jewish captives in 605 B.C. until 536 B.C. when the first group of Jews returned to Jerusalem. The Jews used inclusive reckoning, meaning that they included both the beginning and ending years in their count. It looks like Cyrus made his decree <span style="font-size: x-small;">(Ezra 1:1-3)</span> just before the close of his first year of reign according to the Jewish civil calendar. The earliest the Jews could leave would have been the following spring. Here is a suggested timeline of a few of the final years of Daniel's ministry. To keep it fairly simple, I have not defined accession years for Darius or Cyrus, using only the designations found in the Bible.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PCK8ggahyfw/VmYaRzID3GI/AAAAAAAAAls/AA9RvSJrSkk/s1600/Chronology.001.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PCK8ggahyfw/VmYaRzID3GI/AAAAAAAAAls/AA9RvSJrSkk/s320/Chronology.001.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-13558781647683921092015-10-11T10:04:00.000-07:002015-10-24T23:05:58.424-07:00The Place of a Modern Prophet<b>What is the gift of prophecy?</b><br />
<br />
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">“If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.” </span>Numbers 12:6</div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">“For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” </span>2 Peter 1:21</div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">“But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” </span>Galatians 1:11, 12</div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"><b>A prophet's scope of impact:</b></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<ul>
<li><span class="s1">The writings of some prophets have been nearly universally available </span>(Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Paul).</li>
<li><span class="s1">The availability of some prophetic writings has been limited </span><span class="s2">(1 Chronicles 29:29; Colossians 4:16).</span></li>
<li><span class="s1">Some prophets produced no prophetic writings </span><span class="s2">(Enoch, Elijah, Elisha).</span></li>
<li><span class="s1">Many prophets existed of whom we know little or nothing </span><span class="s2">(1 Samuel 10:5).</span></li>
</ul>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s2">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s2">
</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1"><b>What is the difference between a prophet in the Bible and a prophet today?</b></span><br />
<span class="s1"><b><br /></b></span>
<span class="s1">A modern prophet:</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<ol>
<li>As always, must be tested by the standard of the previous prophetic writings.<ul>
<li>1 Corinthians 14:32; Isaiah 8:20</li>
<li>Jesus Himself was tested — John 1:45; Luke 24:44
</li>
<li>Paul was tested — Acts 17:10, 11
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Has a limited scope of impact, compared to canonical prophets.</li>
<li>Lacks universal recognition.<ul>
<li>1 Corinthians 14:22
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Presents no new truths.<ul>Ecclesiastes 1:9; 3:15
</ul>
</li>
<li>The message of a non-canonical prophet has the same authority as that of canonical prophets.<ul>
<li>Nathan — 2 Samuel 12
</li>
<li>Huldah — 2 Chronicles 34:20-28
</li>
<li>Micaiah — 1 Kings 22
</li>
</ul>
</li>
</d></ol>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span class="s1">
</span></div>
Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-83578164599641636282015-09-30T15:52:00.000-07:002016-12-20T13:32:22.112-08:00Established, Strengthened, and Settled"You know what the three R's are," I recently asked a student.<br />
<br />
"Sure," she replied, "Reading, Writing, and Rather not do it!"<br />
<br />
Well, in true education, the Christian life, we have what I call the three S's.<br />
<br />
"Stablish, Strengthen, Settle." 1 Peter 5:10<br />
<br />
Established, Strengthened, and Settled. This three-word expression is used in <i>Testimonies for the Church</i>, Vol. 5, p. 546. The context has to do with our need to be thoroughly grounded in the truth. But these words also beautifully summarize the three phases of Christian experience. We are <b>established</b> in Christ at our conversion. Our walk with the Lord is to <b>strengthen</b> that experience. And the final phase, which I call crystallization, is when we have become so <b>settled</b> in Christ that we cannot be moved.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Glwb-uydhEU/WFmjNKKmOII/AAAAAAAAAtk/3OMljVF9sdQBw3rDjmnS3Lzc01HI2hBCwCLcB/s1600/3%2BS%2527s.001.jpeg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Glwb-uydhEU/WFmjNKKmOII/AAAAAAAAAtk/3OMljVF9sdQBw3rDjmnS3Lzc01HI2hBCwCLcB/s320/3%2BS%2527s.001.jpeg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-3376400423110932362015-08-24T11:36:00.002-07:002021-10-09T16:01:05.319-07:00Daniel 11Interest in Daniel 11 is growing. This includes a desire to understand the last six verses of the chapter. New views have emerged in recent times and Bible students are divided in their interpretations. Having been a part of this discussion for the past few years, and being familiar with the arguments on each side, I have come to the conclusion that the Seventh-day Adventist church was led by God in its early days to a correct understanding of this important prophetic chapter.<br />
<br />
Here are some resources that relate to this subject:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2018/07/who-is-king-of-south.html" target="_blank">Who is the King of the South?</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Official 2018 Daniel 11 Prophecy Conference Paper)</span><br />
<br /><a href="http://www.thoughtlines.org/2021/10/answering-objections-to-literal-view-of.html" target="_blank">Objections Answered</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Official 2021 Daniel 11 Prophecy Conference Paper)</span><br /><br />
<a href="https://klebrun.blogspot.com/2018/09/daniel-1116.html" target="_blank">Daniel 11:16</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Who is "He that cometh against him?")</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2018/08/testing-daniel-1116-22.html" target="_blank">Testing Daniel 11:16-22</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Rethinking verses 17-21)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="https://youtu.be/5vbrQ1Z6CPI" target="_blank">The Time of the End</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(March 2016 presentation that explains Daniel 11:40-45 and more)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-eastern-question.html" target="_blank">The Eastern Question</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Is it something ministers should preach about?)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="https://youtu.be/nCUUb781ejU" target="_blank">A Revitalized Prophecy</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(July 2015 campmeeting presentation with slides; 50 minutes)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-kings-of-north-and-south.html" target="_blank">The Kings of the North and South</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-west-in-daniel-11.html" target="_blank">The West in Daniel 11</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.thoughtlines.org/2019/05/thy-people-and-remnant-of-israel.html" target="_blank">"Thy People" and the Remnant of Israel</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Presented at the 2019 Las Vegas symposium)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2015/07/of-those-who-reinterpret-prophecies.html" target="_blank">Of Those Who Reinterpret the Prophecies</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2014/11/daniels-climaxes.html" target="_blank">Daniel's Climaxes</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Comparing the destinations reached in Daniel's four lines of prophecy)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="http://klebrun.blogspot.com/2012/09/daniel-1145-and-middle-east-crisis.html" target="_blank">Daniel 11:45 and the Middle East Crisis</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(My first attempt presenting the classical view)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.bibleprophecycentral.com/product-page/daniel-and-revelation-bound-together-with-annotations" target="_blank">Daniel and Revelation Bound Together</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(A sharing book explaining the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation)</span><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.bibleprophecycentral.com/product-page/daniel-history-s-empires-foretold" target="_blank">Daniel: History's Empires Foretold</a> <span style="font-size: xx-small;">(Prophecy Resource Folders for Daniel, arranged by empire or time period)</span>Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-89260368147930806242015-07-21T06:32:00.000-07:002015-07-21T06:35:28.679-07:00Of Those Who Reinterpret the Prophecies“There are persons ready to catch up every new idea. The prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation are misinterpreted. These persons do not consider that <b>the truth has been set forth</b> at the appointed time by the very men whom God was leading to do this special work. These men followed on step by step in the very fulfillment of prophecy, and those who have not had a personal experience in this work are to take the Word of God and believe on ‘their word’ who have been led by the Lord in the proclamation of the first, second, and third angels' messages.” (17MR 14.3)<br />
<br />
“It is true that there are prophecies yet to be fulfilled. But very erroneous work has been done again and again, and will continue to be done by those who seek to find new light in the prophecies, and who begin by <b>turning away from the light that God has already given</b>. . . . But the Lord does not lay upon those who have not had an experience in His work the burden of <b>making a new exposition</b> of those prophecies which He has, by His Holy Spirit, moved upon His chosen servants to explain.” (17MR 15.1)<br />
<br />
“You and other of our brethren must <b>accept the truth as God has given it</b> to His students of prophecy, as they have been led by genuine, living experience, advancing point by point, tested, proved, and tried, until the truth is to them a reality. From their voices and pens the truth in bright, warm rays has gone to all parts of the world, and that which was to them testing truth, as brought by the Lord's delegated messengers, is testing truth to all to whom this message is proclaimed.” (17MR 3.2)<br />
<br />
“There must be no long discussions, <b>no presenting of new theories</b> in regard to prophecies that God has already made plain.” (RH, Nov. 27, 1900 par. 13)Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1539761742790178937.post-75335593021756254232015-07-20T08:05:00.001-07:002015-08-24T16:17:50.164-07:00The Eastern QuestionEllen White's references to the Eastern Question are significant because of statements such as:<br />
<br />
"Let us confine our public efforts to the presentation of the important lines of truth on which we are united, and on which we have clear light." (1SM 167)<br />
<br />
So, her endorsement of a public presentation by our ministers implies (1) that it is an important line of truth, (2) that it is a subject on which the church was united, and (3) that it is a subject on which we have clear light. If a presentation did not meet those criteria, the minister had no business talking about it. The subject should not be discussed in our meetings.<br />
<br />
"Matters of vital importance have been plainly revealed in the Word of God. These subjects are worthy of our deepest thought. But we are not to search into matters on which God has been silent." (1SM 173)<br />
<b><br /></b>
If the Eastern Question can be found in the Word of God, it is worthy of our deepest thought. But if not, we certainly should not be preaching about it.<br />
<br />
The Eastern Question was the diplomatic problem posed by the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Adventist ministers tied the fulfillment of Daniel 11:45 to the ultimate outcome of that question. If Daniel 11:45 has nothing to do with the Ottoman Empire or its aftermath, our ministers were preaching about something on which God is silent.<br />
<br />
But notice the comments of the Lord's messenger endorsing the public presentations on this subject. The sermons were "of special interest." In presenting this subject, Uriah Smith was "fully and thoroughly united with us." What he was presenting was described by Ellen White as "these great events in the near future." And the message was classed as "the truth."<br />
<b><br /></b>
<b>September 6, 1877</b><br />
“Sunday morning the weather was still cloudy, but before it was time for the people to assemble the sun shone forth. Boats and trains poured their living freight upon the ground, as was the case last year. Elder Smith spoke in the morning upon the Eastern question. The subject was of special interest, and the people listened with the most earnest attention. It seemed to be just what they wanted to hear.” (RH 9-6-1877)<br />
<br />
<b>August 24, 1884</b><br />
“Elder Smith spoke on the Sabbath question to a large congregation this morning, and this evening he speaks on the Eastern question. I feel so grateful that Brother Smith is not lost to the cause. He seems fully and thoroughly united with us; seems like Brother Smith of old. Oh, thank the Lord! Praise His Holy Name, that His love, His wondrous love has been exercised toward the children of men. It is so dark, I must stop. Will write you tomorrow.” (Lt55-1884 par. 6)<br />
<br />
<b>August 25, 1884</b><br />
“Aug. 25, 11:00 a.m. The first two pages were written Sunday after I had spoken to the crowd. The evening meeting was largely attended. Elder Smith spoke with great clearness, and many listened with open eyes, ears, and mouths. The outsiders seemed to be intensely interested in the Eastern question. He closed with a very solemn address to those who had not been preparing for these great events in the near future.” (Lt55-1884 par. 7)<br />
<br />
<b>December 25, 1898</b><br />
“Elder Daniells speaks this evening upon the Eastern Question. May the Lord give His Holy Spirit to inspire the hearts to make the truth plain.” (Ms189-1898 par. 9)Ken LeBrunhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15968227193387417233noreply@blogger.com6