Daniel Chapter 8 Pt 2

Daniel Chapter 8 verses- 13. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?    14.    And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

This right here is such an amazing prophecy. How it fits hand in hand with history is undeniable. It takes study to fully comprehend the depths of the prophecy but not everyone has time or wants to make time for a truly in-depth study. For those who are not interested in details I am going to give a rundown of the 2300 day prophecy. However, I ask that should you have questions about the validity of what I give you that you please, by the will of our God, please study hard to find the truth of the matter. Do NOT dismiss what I say out of hand without giving it hard study, much prayer and a lot of contemplation of the word of God. Do NOT trust your own possible knee-jerk reaction to ignore all of this. Likewise if you should choose to believe what I say, then study even harder. Yes, you read that right. Study harder, get all the details, comb through the vast stores of historical knowledge, compare one theory with another, pray, pray and pray because this treasure you are choosing to believe is very special and God would have us know why we believe as we do. 

The quick rundown-

2300 days = 2300 prophetic years. The Sanctuary to be cleansed, while initially thought to be the earth itself, was discovered to be the Heavenly Sanctuary upon which the earthly was patterned after. The Heavenly Sanctuary where our Savior went upon His ascension, there He went to prepare for us a pleace, there He went as our heavenly high priest. Just as the earthly sanctuary needed cleansing once a year, the heavenly sanctuary needs cleansing once for all eternity. 

In-depth study, based off of the Book- Daniel and Revelation by Uriah Smith - 

VERSE 13. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?    14.    And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

The time.   These two verses close the vision proper of chapter 8; and they introduce the one remaining point which of all others would naturally be of the most absorbing interest to the prophet and to all the church; namely, the time the desolating powers previously brought to view were to continue. How long shall they continue their course of oppression against God's people, and of blasphemy against high Heaven? Daniel, if time had been given, might perhaps have asked this question himself, but God is ever ready to anticipate our wants, and sometimes to answer even before we ask. Hence two celestial beings appear upon the scene, holding a conversation, in the hearing of the prophet, upon this question which it is so important that the church should understand. Daniel heard one saint speaking. What this saint spoke at this time we are not informed; but there must have been something either in the matter or the manner of this speaking which made a deep impression upon the mind of Daniel, inasmuch as he uses it in the very next sentence as a designating title, calling the angel "that certain saint which spake." He may have spoken something of the same nature as that which the seven thunders of the Apocalypse uttered (Rev. 10:3), and which, for some good reason, John was restrained from writing. But another saint asked this one that spake an important question: How long the vision? and both the question and the answer are placed upon record, which is prima-facie evidence that this is a matter which it was designed that the church should understand. And this view is further confirmed by the fact that the angel did not ask this question for his own information, inasmuch as the answer was addressed to Daniel, as the one whom it chiefly concerned, and for whose information it was given."And he said unto me," said Daniel, recording the answer to the angel's question, "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed."

VERSE 13. Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?    14.    And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

The daily sacrifice. We have PROOF in verse 13 that sacrifice is the wrong word to be supplied in connection with the word daily. If the daily sacrifice of the Jewish service is here meant, or, in other words, the taking away of that sacrifice, as some suppose, which sacrifice was at a certain point of time taken away, there would be no propriety in the question, How long the vision concerning it? This question evidently implies that those agents or events to which the vision relates, occupy a long series of years. Continuance of time is the central idea. And the whole time of the vision is filled by what is here called the daily and the transgression of desolation. Hence the daily can not be the daily sacrifice of the Jews, the taking away of which, when the time came for it, occupied comparatively but an instant of time. It MUST denote something which occupies a series of years.

The word here rendered daily occurs in the Old Testament, according to the Hebrew Concordance, one hundred and two times, and is, in the great majority of instances, rendered continual or continually. The idea of sacrifice does not attach to the word at all. Nor is there any word in the text which signifies sacrifice; that is WHOLLY a supplied word, the translators putting in that word which their understanding of the text seemed to demand. But they evidently entertained an erroneous view, the sacrifices of the Jews not being referred to at all. It appears, therefore, more in accordance with both the construction and the context, to suppose that the word daily refers a desolating power, like the "transgression of desolation," with which it is connected.

 Then we have two desolating powers, which for a long period oppress, or desolate the church. Literally, the text may be rendered, "How long the vision [concerning] the continuance and the transgression of desolation?" - The word desolation being related to both continuance and transgression, as though it were expressed in full thus: "The continuance of desolation and the transgression of desolation." 

By the "continuance of desolation," or the perpetual desolation, we must understand that paganism, through all its long history, is meant; and when we consider the long ages through which paganism had been the chief agency of Satan's opposition to the work of God in the earth, the propriety of the term continuance or perpetual, as applied to it, becomes apparent. By "the transgression of desolation" is meant the papacy. The phrase describing this latter power is stronger than that used to describe paganism. It is the transgression (or rebellion, as the word also means) of desolation; as though under this period of the history of the church the desolating power had rebelled against all restraint previously imposed upon it.

From a religious point of view, the world has presented only these two phases of opposition against the Lord's work in the earth. Hence although three earthly governments are introduced in the prophecy as oppressors of the church, they are here ranged under two heads; "the daily" and the "transgression of desolation." - Medo-Persia was pagan; Grecia was pagan; Rome in its first phase was pagan; these all were embraced in the "daily." Then comes the papal form, - "the transgression of desolation" - a marvel of craft and cunning, an incarnation of fiendish blood-thirstiness and cruelty. No wonder the cry has gone up from suffering martyrs, from age to age, "How long, 0 Lord, how long?" And no wonder the Lord, in order that hope might not wholly die out of the hearts of his down-trodden, waiting people, has lifted before them the vail of futurity, showing them the consecutive future events of the world's history, till all these persecuting powers shall meet an utter and everlasting destruction, and giving them glimpses beyond of the unfading glories of their eternal inheritance.

The Lord's eye is upon his people. The furnace will be heated no hotter than is necessary to consume the dross. It is through much tribulation we are to enter the kingdom; and the word tribulation is from tribulum, a threshing sledge. Blow after blow must be laid upon us, till all the wheat is beaten free from the chaff, and we are made fit for the heavenly garner. But not a kernel of wheat will be lost. Says the Lord to his people, "Ye are the light of the world," "the salt of the earth." In his eyes there is nothing else on the earth of consequence or importance. Hence the peculiar question here asked, How long the vision respecting the daily and the transgression of desolation? Concerning what? - the glory of earthly kingdoms? the skill of renowned warriors? the fame of mighty conquerors? the greatness of human empire? - No; but concerning the sanctuary and the host, the people and worship of the Most High. How long shall they be trodden under foot? Here is where all Heaven's interest and sympathy are enlisted. He who touches the people of God, touches not mere mortals, weak and helpless, but Omnipotence; he opens an account which must be settled at the bar of Heaven. And soon all these accounts will be adjusted, the iron heel of oppression will itself be crushed, and a people will be brought out of the furnace prepared to shine as the stars forever and ever. To be one who is an object of interest to heavenly beings, one whom the providence of God is engaged to preserve while here, and crown with immortality hereafter - what an exalted position! How much higher than that of any king, president, or potentate of earth? Reader, are you one of the number?

Respecting the 2300 days, introduced for the first time in verse 14, there are no data in this chapter from which to determine their commencement and close, or tell what portion of the world's history they cover. It is necessary, therefore, for the present, to pass them by. Let the reader be assured, however, that we are not left in any uncertainty concerning those days. The declaration respecting them is a part of a revelation which is given for the instruction of the people of God, and is consequently to be understood. They are spoken of in the midst of a prophecy which the angel Gabriel was commanded to make Daniel understand; and it may be safely assumed that Gabriel somewhere carried out this instruction. It will accordingly be found that the mystery which hangs over these days in this chapter, is dispelled in the next.

The sanctuary.  Connected with the 2300 days is another subject of equal importance, which now presents itself for consideration; namely, the sanctuary; and with this is also connected the subject of its cleansing. An examination of -- these subjects will reveal the importance of having an understanding of the commencement and termination of the 2300 days, that we may know when the great event called "the cleansing of the sanctuary" is to transpire; for all the inhabitants of the earth, as will in due time appear, have a personal interest in that solemn work.

Several objects have been claimed by different ones as the sanctuary here mentioned:      (1)    The earth;    (2)     The land of Canaan;    (3)    The church;     (4)    The sanctuary, the "true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man," which is "in the heavens," and of which the Jewish tabernacle was a type, pattern, or figure. Heb. 8:1, 2; 9:23, 24. These conflicting claims must be decided by the scriptures; and fortunately the testimony is neither meager nor ambiguous.

1.   Is the earth the sanctuary?    The word sanctuary occurs in the Old and New Testaments one hundred and forty-four times, and from the definitions of lexicographers, and its use in the Bible, we learn that it is used to signify a holy or sacred place, a dwelling-place for the Most High. If, therefore, the earth is the sanctuary, it must answer to this definition; but what single characteristic pertaining to this earth is found which will satisfy the definition? It is neither a holy nor a sacred place, nor is it a dwelling-place for the Most High. It has no mark of distinction, except as being a revolted planet, marred by sin, scarred and withered by the curse. Moreover, it is nowhere in all the Scriptures called the sanctuary. Only one text can be produced in favor of this view, and that only by an uncritical application. Isa. 60:13 says: "The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary: and I will make the place of my feet glorious." This language undoubtedly refers to the new earth; but even that is not called the sanctuary, but only the "place" of the sanctuary, just as it is called "the place" of the Lord's feet; an expression which probably denotes the continual presence of God with his people, as it was revealed to John when it was said, "Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God." Rev. 21:3. All that can be said of the earth, therefore, is, that when renewed, it will be the place where the sanctuary of God will be located. It can present not a shadow of a claim to being the sanctuary at the present time, or the sanctuary of the prophecy.

2.   Is the land of Canaan the sanctuary?    So far as we may be governed by the definition of the word, it can present no better claim than the earth to that distinction. If we inquire where in the Bible it is called the sanctuary, a few texts are brought forward which seem to be supposed by some to furnish the requisite testimony. The first of these is Ex. 15:17. Moses, in his song of triumph and praise to God after the passage of the Red Sea, exclaimed: "Thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance, in the place, 0 Lord, which thou hast made for thee to dwell in, in the Sanctuary, 0 Lord, which thy hands have established." A writer who urges this text, says, "I ask the reader to pause, and examine and settle the question most distinctly, before he goes further. What is the sanctuary here spoken of?" But it would be far safer for the reader not to attempt to settle the question definitely from this one isolated text before comparing it with other scriptures. Moses here speaks in anticipation. His language is a prediction of what God would do for his people. Let us see how it was accomplished. If we find, in the fulfilment, that the land in which they were planted is called the sanctuary, it will greatly strengthen the claim that is based upon, this text. If, on the other hand, we find that a plain distinction drawn between the land and the sanctuary, then Ex. 15:17 must be interpreted accordingly.

We turn to David, who records as a matter of history what Moses uttered as a matter of prophecy. Ps. 78:53, 54. The subject of the psalmist here, is the deliverance of Israel from Egyptian servitude, and their establishment in the promised land; and he says: "And he [God] led them on safely, so that they feared not: but the sea overwhelmed their enemies. And he brought them to the border of his sanctuary, even to this mountain, which his right hand had purchased." The "mountain" here mentioned by David is the same as the "mountain of thine inheritance" spoken of by Moses, in which the people were to be planted; and this mountain David calls, not the sanctuary, but only the border of the sanctuary. What, then, was the sanctuary? Verse 69 of the same psalm informs us:  "And he built his sanctuary like high palaces, like the earth which he hath established forever." The same distinction between the sanctuary and the land is pointed out in the prayer of good king Jehoshaphat.2 Chron. 20:7, 8:  "Art not thou our God, who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham thy friend forever? And they dwelt therein, and have built thee a sanctuary therein for thy name. " Taken alone, some try to draw an inference from Ex. 15:17 that the mountain was the sanctuary; but when we take in connection with it the language of David, which is a record of the fulfilment of Moses's prediction, and an inspired commentary upon his language, such an idea cannot be entertained; for David plainly says that the mountain was simply the "border" of the sanctuary; and that in that border, or land, the sanctuary was "built" like high palaces, reference being made to the beautiful temple of the Jews, the center and symbol of all their worship. But whoever will read carefully Ex. 15:17 will see that not even an inference is necessary that Moses by the word sanctuary means the mountain of inheritance, much less the whole land of Palestine. In the freedom of poetic license, he employs elliptical expressions, and passes rapidly from one idea or object to another. First, the inheritance engages his attention, and he speaks of it; then the fact that the Lord was to dwell there; then the place he was to provide for his dwelling there; namely, the sanctuary which he would cause to be built. David thus associates Mount Zion and Judah together in Ps. 78 68, because Zion was located in Judah.

The three texts, Ex. 15:17; Ps. 78:54, 69, are the ones chiefly relied on to prove that the land of Canaan is the sanctuary; but, singularly enough, the two latter, in plain language, clear away the ambiguity of the first, and thereby disprove the claim that is based thereon. Having disposed of the main proof on this point, it would hardly seem worthwhile to spend time with those texts from which only inferences can be drawn. As there is, however, only one even of this class, we will refer to it, that no point may be left unnoticed. Isa. 63:18:  "The people of thy holiness have possessed it but a little while: our adversaries have trodden down thy sanctuary."  This language is as applicable to the temple as to the land! for when the land was overrun with the enemies of Israel, their temple was laid in ruins. This is plainly stated in verse 11 of the next chapter:  "Our holy and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised thee, is burned up with fire."  The text therefore proves nothing for this view.

Respecting the earth or the land of Canaan as the sanctuary, we offer one thought more. If either constitutes the sanctuary, it should not only be somewhere described as such, but the same idea should be carried through to the end, and the purification of the earth or of Palestine should be called the cleansing of the sanctuary. The earth is indeed defiled, and it is to be purified by fire; but fire, as we shall see, is not the agent which is used in the cleansing of the sanctuary; and this purification of the earth, or any part of it, is nowhere in the Bible called the cleansing of the sanctuary.

3.   Is the church the sanctuary? The evident mistrust with which this idea is suggested, is a virtual surrender of the argument before it is presented. The one solitary text adduced in its support is Ps. 114:1, 2: "When Israel went out of Egypt, the house of Jacob from a people of strange Language; Judah was his sanctuary, and Israel his dominion." Should we take this text in its most literal sense, what would it prove respecting the sanctuary? It would prove that the sanctuary was confined to one of the twelve tribes; and hence that a portion of the church only, not the whole of it, constitutes the sanctuary. But this, proving too little for the theory under consideration, proves nothing. Why Judah is called the sanctuary in the text quoted, need not be a matter of perplexity, when we remember that God chose Jerusalem, which was in Judah, as the place of his sanctuary. "But chose," says David, "the tribe of Judah, the Mount Zion which he loved. And he built his sanctuary like high palaces, like the earth which he hath established forever." This clearly shows the connection which existed between Judah and the sanctuary. That tribe itself was not the sanctuary; but it is once spoken of as such when Israel came forth from Egypt, because God purposed that in the midst of the territory of that tribe his sanctuary should be located. But even if it could be shown that the church is anywhere called the sanctuary, it would be of no consequence to our present purpose, which is to determine what constitutes the sanctuary of Dan. 8:13, 14; for the church is there spoken of as another object: "To give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot." That by the term host the church is here meant, none will dispute; the sanctuary is therefore another and a different object.

4.   Is the temple in heaven the sanctuary?  We will answer this question in our next study… 

May God bless and keep us, enlightening us to His will and His will only. May we be blessed with wisdom and understanding. May the Holy Spirit guide us as we search for truth!

Daniel Chapter 8 Pt 1

 This is a study of Daniel Chapter Eight verses 1-12 

READ Daniel 8:1 - 'In the third year of the reign of king Belshazzar a vision appeared unto me, even, unto I me Daniel, after that which appeared, unto me at the first.'

The first year of Belshazzar was B. C. 540. His third year, in which this vision was given, would consequently be 538. If Daniel was about twenty years of age when he was carried to Babylon in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, B. C. 606, he was at this time about eighty-eight years of age. The vision he speaks of as the one "which appeared unto him at the first," is doubtless the vision of the seventh chapter, which he had in the first year of Belshazzar.

READ Daniel 8:2 - 'And I saw in a vision; and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace which is in the province of Elam; and I saw in a vision, and I was by the river of Ulai.'

Shushan, as we learn from Prideaux,* was the metropolis of the province of Elam. This was in the hands of the Babylonians at that time, and there was a royal palace situated there. Daniel, going about the king's business, was there.

*The Old and New Testament connected in the history of the Jews and Neighboring Nations... By Humphrey Prideaux

READ Daniel 8:3,4 - 'Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns; and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last. 4. I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither was there any that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will, and became great.'

Kingdoms of Media and Persia -- In verse 20 an interpretation of this symbol is given us in plain language-- "The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia." 

The two horns represented the two nationalities of which the empire consisted. The higher came up last. This represented the Persian element, which, from being at first simply an ally of the Medes, came to be the leading division of the empire.

The different directions in which the ram was seen pushing reveal the directions in which the Medes and Persians carried out their conquests. No worldly powers could defeat them while they were attaining the exalted position which God called them to attain. At that time the Medo-Persian kingdom went from India to Ethiopia, to the ends of the then known world, over a hundred and twenty-seven provinces.

READ Daniel 8:5-7 - 'And as I was considering, behold, a he-goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth, and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes. 6. And he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and ran unto him in the fury of his power. 7. And I saw him come close unto the ram, and he was moved with choler against him, and smote the ram, and brake his two horns; and there was no power in the ram to stand before him, but he cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him: and there was none that could deliver the ram out of his hand.'

Kingdom of Grecia "As I was considering," says the prophet. The thought that went into all he was shown had to be tremendous. You weren't used of God in this way, given visions and not contemplate them, that would be absurd wouldn't it?

Look at Verse 21- "And the rough goat is the king [or kingdom] of Grecia." 

Again we have the Bible itself supplying the meaning of the symbol used.

The goat came from the west. Grecia lay west of Persia. "On the face of the whole earth." He covered all the ground as he passed; that is, swept everything before him; he left nothing behind. He "touched not the ground." Such was the marvelous celerity of his movements that he did not seem to touch the ground, but to fly from point to point with the swiftness of the wind; the same feature is brought to view by the four wings of the leopard in the vision of chapter 7.

Alexander, the "Notable Horn." -- The notable horn between his eyes. This is explained in verse 21 to be the first king of the Macedonian empire. This king was Alexander the Great.

Verses 6 and 7 give a concise account of the overthrow of the Persian empire by Alexander. The contests between the Greeks and Persians are said to have been exceedingly furious; and some of the scenes as recorded in history are vividly brought to mind by the figure used in the prophecy, - a ram standing before the river, and the goat running unto him in the fury of his power. Alexander first vanquished the generals of Darius at the River Granicus in Phrygia; he next attacked and totally routed Darius at the passes of Issus in Cilicia, and afterward on the plains of Arbela in Syria. This last battle occurred B. C. 331, and marked the conclusion of the Persian empire, for by this event Alexander became complete master of the whole country. 

Ptolemy begins the reign of Alexander B. C. 332; but it was not till the battle of Arbela, the year following, that he became, according to Prideaux (Vol. 1, p. 378), " absolute lord of that empire to the utmost extent in which it was ever possessed by the Persian kings." On the eve of this engagement, Darius sent ten of his chief relatives to sue for peace; and upon their presenting their conditions to Alexander, he replied, " Tell your sovereign . . . that the world will not permit two suns nor two sovereigns! "

The language of verse 7 sets forth the completeness of the subjection of Medo-Persia to Alexander. The two horns were broken, and the ram was cast to the ground and stamped upon, Persia was subdued, the country ravaged, its armies cut to pieces and scattered, its cities plundered, and the royal city of Persepolis, the capital of the Persian empire, and even in its ruins one of the wonders of the world to the present day, was sacked and burned. Thus the ram had no power to stand before the goat, and there was none that could deliver him out of his hand.

READ Daniel 8:8- 'Therefore the he-goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four winds of heaven.'

The Great Horn Broken.

The conqueror is greater than the conquered.

The ram, Medo-Persia, became great; the goat, Grecia, became very great. And when he was strong, the great horn was broken.

Human foresight and speculation would have said, When he becomes weak, his kingdom racked by rebellion, or paralyzed by luxury, then the horn will be broken, and the kingdom shattered. But Daniel saw it broken in the very prime of its strength and the height of its power, when every beholder would have exclaimed, Surely, the kingdom is established, and nothing can overthrow it. Thus it is often with the wicked. The horn of their strength is broken when they think they stand most firm.

Four Notable Horns Come Up. Alexander fell in the prime of life. After his death there arose much confusion among his followers respecting the succession. It was finally agreed, after a seven. days' contest, that his natural brother, Philip Aridaeus, should be declared king. By him, and Alexander's infant sons, Alexander Aegus and Hercules, the name and show of the Macedonian empire were for a time sustained; but all these persons were soon murdered; and the family of Alexander being then extinct, the chief commanders of the army, who had gone into different parts of the empire as governors of the provinces, assumed the title of kings. They thereupon fell to leaguing and warring with one another to such a decree that within the space of twenty-two years from Alexander's death, the number was reduced to - how many? Five ? - No. Three ? - No. Two ? - No. But four - just the number specified in the prophecy; for four notable horns were to come up toward the four winds of heaven in place of the great horn that was broken.

These were--(1) Cassander, who had Greece and the neighboring countries (2) Lysimachus, who had Asia Minor  3) Seleucus, who had Syria and Babylon, and from whom came the line of kings known as the " Seleucidae," so famous in history (4)Ptolemy, son of Lagus, who had Egypt, and from whom sprang the " Lagidae." These held dominion toward the four winds of heaven.

Cassander had the western parts; Lysimachus had the northern regions; Seleucus possessed the eastern countries; and Ptolemy had the southern portion of the empire. These four horns may therefore be named Macedonia, Thrace (which then included Asia Minor, and those parts lying on the Hellespont and Bosphorus), Syria, and Egypt.

READ Daniel 8:9-12- 'And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land. 10. And it waxed great, even to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them.    11. Yea, be magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.    12. And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced and prospered.'

A Little Horn Comes Forth. A third power is here introduced into the prophecy. In the explanation which the angel gave to Daniel of these symbols, this one is not described in language so definite as that concerning Medo-Persia and Grecia. Hence a flood of wild conjecture is at once let loose. Had not the angel, in language which cannot be misunderstood, stated that Medo-Persia and Grecia were denoted by the ram and the he-goat, it is impossible to tell what applications men would have given us of those symbols. Probably they would have applied them to anything and everything but the right objects. Leave men a moment to their own judgment in the interpretation of prophecy, and we immediately have the most sublime exhibitions of human fancy.

There are two leading applications of the symbol now under consideration, which are all that need be noticed in these brief thoughts. The first is that the " little horn " here introduced denotes the Syrian king, Antiochus Epiphanes; the second, that it denotes the Roman power. It is an easy matter to test the claims of these two positions.

Does the Little Horn Denote Antiochus?

I. Does it mean Antiochus? If so, this king must fulfil the specifications of the prophecy? If he does not fulfil them, the application cannot be made to him. The little horn came out of one of the four horns of the goat. It was then a separate power, existing independently of, and distinct from, any of the horns of the goat. Was Antiochus such a power?

1.  Who was Antiochus? From the time that Seleucus made himself king over the Syrian portion of Alexander's empire, thus constituting the Syrian horn of the goat, until that country was conquered by the Romans, twenty-six kings ruled in succession over that territory. The eighth of these, in order, was Antiochus Epiphanes. Antiochus, then, was simply one of the twenty-six kings who constituted the Syrian horn of the goat. He was, for the time being, that horn. Hence he could not be at the same time a separate and independent power, or another and remarkable horn, as the little horn was.

If it were proper to apply the little horn to any one of these twenty-six Syrian kings, it should certainly be applied to the most powerful and illustrious of them all; but Antiochus Epiphanes did not by any means sustain this character. Although he took the name Epiphanes, that is, The Illustrious, he was illustrious only in name; for nothing, says Prideaux, on the authority of Polybius, Livy, and Diodorus Siculus, could be more alien to his true character; for, on account of his vile and extravagant folly, some thinking him a fool and others a madman, they changed his name of Epiphanes, " The Illustrious," into Epimanes, " The Madman."

3. Antiochus the Great, the father of Epiphanes, being terribly defeated in a war with the Romans, was enabled to procure peace only by the payment of a prodigious sum of money, and the surrender of a portion of his territory; and, as a pledge that he would faithfully adhere to the terms of the treaty, he was obliged to give hostages, among whom was this very Epiphanes, his son, who was carried to Rome. The Romans ever after maintained this ascendency.

4. The little horn waxed exceeding great; but this Antiochus did not wax exceeding great; on the contrary, he did not enlarge his dominion, except by some temporary conquests in Egypt, which he immediately relinquished when the Romans took the part of Ptolemy, and commanded him to desist from his designs in that quarter. The rage of his disappointed ambition he vented upon the unoffending Jews.

5. The little horn, in comparison with the powers that preceded it, was exceeding great. Persia is simply called great, though it reigned over a hundred and twenty-seven provinces.

Esther 1:1 'Now it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus, (this is Ahasuerus which reigned, from India even unto Ethiopia, over an hundred and seven and twenty provinces)'

Grecia, being more extensive still, is called very great. Now the little horn, which waxed exceeding great, must surpass them both. How absurd, then, to apply this to Antiochus, who was obliged to abandon Egypt at the dictation of the Romans, to whom he paid enormous sums of money as tribute. The Religious Encyclopedia gives us this item of his history: "Finding his resources exhausted, he resolved to go into Persia to levy tribute, and collect large sums which he had agreed to pay the Romans."  It cannot take long for any one to decide the question which was the greater power, - the one which evacuated Egypt, or the one which commanded that evacuation; the one which exacted tribute, or the one which was compelled to pay it.

6. The little horn was to stand up against the Prince of princes. The Prince of princes here means, beyond controversy, Jesus Christ.

 Dan. 9:25 'Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times'

 Acts 3:15 'And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses'

 Rev. 1:5 'And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood'

But Antiochus died one hundred and sixty-four years before our Lord was born. The prophecy cannot, therefore, apply to him; for he does not fulfil the specifications in one single particular. The question may then be asked how any one has ever come to apply it to him. We answer, Romanists take that view to avoid the application of the prophecy to themselves; and many Protestants follow them, in order to oppose the doctrine that the second advent of Christ is now at hand.

The Little Horn Denotes Rome.

II. It has been an easy matter to show that the little horn does not denote Antiochus. It will be just as easy to show that it does denote Rome.

1. The field of vision here is substantially the same as that covered by Nebuchadnezzar's image of chapter 2, and Daniel's vision of chapter 7. And in both these prophetic delineations , we have found that the power which succeeded Grecia as the fourth great power, was Rome. The only natural inference would be that the little horn, the power which in this vision succeeds Grecia as an " exceeding great " power, is also Rome.

2. The little horn comes forth from one of the horns of the goat. How, it may be asked, can this be true of Rome? It is unnecessary to remind the reader that earthly governments are not introduced into prophecy till they become in some way connected with the people of God. Rome became connected with the Jews, the people of God at that time, by the famous Jewish League B. C. 161. 1 Maccabees 1:8; Josephus's Antiquities, book 12, chap. 10, see. 6; Prideaux, Vol. II, p. 166. But seven years before this, that is, in B. C. 168, Rome had conquered Macedonia, and made that country a part of its empire. Rome is therefore introduced into prophecy just as, from the conquered Macedonian horn of the goat, it is going forth to new conquests in other directions. It therefore appeared to the prophet, or may be properly spoken of in this prophecy, as coming forth from one of the horns of the goat.

3. The little horn waxed great toward the south. This was true of Rome. Egypt was made a province of the Roman empire B. C. 30, and continued such for some centuries.

4. The little horn waxed great toward the east. This also was true of Rome. Rome conquered Syria B. C. 65, and made it a province.

5. The little horn waxed great toward the pleasant land. So did Rome. Judea is called the pleasant land in many scriptures. The Romans made it a province of their empire, B. C. 63, and eventually destroyed the city and the temple, and scattered the Jews ovaer the face of the whole earth.

6.  The little horn waxed great even to the host of heaven. Rome did this also. The host of heaven, when used in a symbolic sense in reference to events transpiring upon the earth, must denote persons of illustrious character or exalted position. The great red dragon (Rev. 12:4) is said to have cast down a third part of the stars of heaven to the ground. The dragon is there interpreted to symbolize pagan Rome, and the stars it cast to the ground were Jewish rulers. Evidently it is the same power and the same work that is here brought to view, which again makes it necessary to apply this growing horn to Rome.

7. The little horn magnified himself even to the Prince of the host. Rome alone did this. In the interpretation (verse 25) this is called striding up against the Prince of princes. How clear an allusion to the crucifixion of our Lord under the jurisdiction of the Romans.

Rome in Two Aspects.

8.   By the little horn the daily sacrifice was taken away. This little horn must be understood to symbolize Rome in its entire history, including its two phases, pagan and papal. These two phases are elsewhere spoken of as the "daily " (sacrifice is a supplied word) and the " transgression of desolation;" the daily (desolation) signifying the pagan form, and the transgression of desolation, the papal. (See on verse 13.) In the actions ascribed to this power, sometimes one form is spoken of, sometimes the other. "By him" (the papal form) "the daily" (the pagan form) "was taken away." Pagan Rome was remodeled into papal Rome. And the place of his sanctuary, or worship, the city of Rome, was cast down. The seat of government was removed by Constantine in A. D. 330 to Constantinople. This same transaction is brought to view in Rev. 13:2, where it is said that the dragon, pagan Rome, gave to the beast, papal Rome, his seat, the city of Rome.

9. A host was given him (the little horn) against the daily. The barbarians that subverted the Roman empire in the changes, attritions, and transformations of those times, became converts to the Catholic faith, and the instruments of the dethronement of their former religion. Though conquering Rome politically, they were themselves vanquished religions by the theology of Rome, and became the perpetuators of the same empire in another phase. And this was brought about by reason of "transgression; " that is, by the working of the mystery of iniquity. The papacy is the most cunningly contrived, false ecclesiastical system ever devised; and it may be called a system of iniquity because it has committed its abominations and practiced its orgies of superstition in the garb, and under the pretense, of pure and undefiled religion.

10. The little horn cast the truth to the ground, and practiced and prospered. This describes, in few words, the work and career of the papacy. The truth is by it hideously caricatured; it is loaded with traditions; it is turned into mummery and superstition; it is cast down and obscured.

And this antichristian power has "practiced," - practiced its deceptions upon the people, practiced its schemes of cunning to carry out its own ends and aggrandize its own power.

And it has "prospered." It has made war with the saints, and prevailed against them. It has run its allotted career, and is soon to be broken without hand, to be given to the burning flame, and to perish in the consuming glories of the second appearing of our Lord.

Rome meets all the specifications of the prophecy. No other power does meet them. Hence Rome, and no other, is the power in question. And while the descriptions given in the word of God of the character of this monstrous system are fully met, the prophecies of its baleful history have been most strikingly and accurately fulfilled.

To be continued... 

Prophecy Puzzle.

 The prophecy truly does sound mysterious but when you're given the puzzle pieces and they fit into the puzzle, you'd be foolish to toss the pieces away and exclaim the puzzle cannot be solved. So many have done just this. They've read these words and have expected to understand as if they weren't prophetic at all. I was one of these people. I'd read these words and images of real beasts would pop up in my imagination. I picture that lion with wings, that bear with ribs in its mouth, the leopard ….  I PICTURED them just as most people do. The reality that right there just a few verses down we are told they represent kings/kingdoms should knock the vision of the beasts from our minds and replace them with those kingdoms. Only we have to look at history's big picture and take Babylon which is given to us, take Medo-Perisa, take Greece… and then we need to fill in the blanks with the history that followed. We need to take the pieces of the puzzle and change the strange figurative pictures into reality. We can't keep them in those beast images and shrug our shoulders, waiting for beasts to appear fitting the strange descriptions. We have to let the LORD guide us. We have to be willing to take the puzzle pieces given to us and examine them fitting them into the puzzle board. If we ignore those pieces because we didn't make them ourselves, then we deprive ourselves of the truth God has revealed to others using their talents. We must fit the pieces so that in our minds we are truly comprehended the TRUTH. We must take the puzzle apart that others have put together and do it over again so it's our understanding the Holy Spirit is enlightening. If we refuse, we are rejecting light, rejecting truth, and for what? Our own cherished beliefs and traditions? Our own beloved deceptions we've been led to believe are truths? God help us! God please help us! We need God so desperately and nothing but God! Please LORD see if there is any wicked ways in us and lead us in YOUR WAY EVERLASTING! Rip the blinders from our eyes! Let us only see TRUTH no matter how much it destroys something we think we love. If that something isn't YOU, then destroy it so we only have YOU.

Dan 7:1  In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters. 

((Daniel Dreams))

Dan 7:2  Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea. 

((Four Winds = strife, political commotion, and war

Great Sea = peoples, and nations, and tongues))

Dan 7:3  And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.  ((Four kings/kingdoms))

Dan 7:4  The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.  ((Babylon))

Dan 7:5  And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh. ((Medo-Persia))

Dan 7:6  After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.  ((Greece))

Dan 7:7  After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. ((Rome))

Dan 7:8  I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. ((Rome divided -pagan/papal))

Dan 7:9  I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. ((God))

Dan 7:10  A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. ((Judgment))

Dan 7:11  I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.  ((Little Horn-Beast powers will continue to the end of evil))

Dan 7:12  As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time. ((Babylon/Medo-Persia/Greece visages of all continued to the last Kingdom))

Dan 7:13  I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 

Dan 7:14  And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. (( Jesus' everlasting kingdom ))

Dan 7:15  I Daniel was grieved in my spirit in the midst of my body, and the visions of my head troubled me. 

Dan 7:16  I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things. 

Dan 7:17  These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. 

Dan 7:18  But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever. 

Dan 7:19  Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet; 

Dan 7:20  And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. 

Dan 7:21  I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; 

Dan 7:22  Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. 

Dan 7:23  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. 

Dan 7:24  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. 

Dan 7:25  And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. 

Dan 7:26  But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. 

Dan 7:27  And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him. 

Dan 7:28  Hitherto is the end of the matter. As for me Daniel, my cogitations much troubled me, and my countenance changed in me: but I kept the matter in my heart. 

God's people will prevail. Daniel saw history as it has unfolded and his prophecies have come true one by one and nothing will keep the fulfillment of all his prophecies given him by God, from occurring just as predicted.

We have to trust in the Lord, trust in His word. His saints are persecuted throughout history, but there is a kingdom to come, a kingdom we look forward to.

Matthew 25:34 'Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world'

Matthew 6:19-21 'Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: {6:20} But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: {6:21} For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.'

Matthew 6:10 'Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven.'

Daniel Chapter 7 Pt 7 - God Tells Us the Future.

 Truth in prophecy is so amazing when you comprehend the reality that our God knows the future and allowed us insight into this knowledge of His. No, we don't know what's going to happen to us personally in our lives, we aren't given individual prophecies. We aren't even given yearly prophecies. We've been given a BIG picture prophecy- in the 600's BC Daniel, a Biblical prophet, was given a prophecy that extended all the way to Jesus' Second Coming. Daniel was given a big picture and then that big picture was expounded on a few more times with more and more details. This amazing prophecy foretold Christ's ministry and death as the details are unfolded. God wants us to know our future. Not the future of our temporal day-to-day life, not the future of the day of our death, not the future that mankind strives to delve into the dark arts of Satan's world using what they term Psychic powers. God wants us to know our future AFTER our temporal life! We CAN know what happens after death. We can know so much if only we are willing to study the word of our LORD.

In this study of Daniel's prophecy we are now at a place where we are talking about the Fourth Beast and the Little Horn. If you've followed the studies to this point you know the Little Horn power represents the Papacy. We know there is a prophecy that extends to the year 1798. Here read this paragraph from yesterday-

'The Judgment Shall Sit.

After describing the terrible career of the little born, and stating that the saints should be given into his hand for 1260 years, bringing us down to 1798, verse 26 declares: "But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end." In verse 10 of the same chapter we have substantially the same expression relative to the judgment- " The judgment was set." It would seem consistent to suppose that the same judgment is referred to in both instances. But the sublime scene described in verse 10 is the opening of the investigative Judgment in the sanctuary in heaven, as will appear in remarks on Dan. 8: 14 and 9: 25 27. The opening of this judgment scene is located by the prophecy at the close of the great prophetic period of 2300 years, which terminated in 1844. Four years after this, in 1848, the great revolution which shook so many thrones in Europe, drove the pope also from his dominions. His restoration shortly after was through the force of foreign bayonets, by which alone he was upheld till his final loss of temporal power in 1870. The overthrow of the papacy in 1798 marked the conclusion of the prophetic period of 1260 years, and constituted the "deadly wound " prophesied in Rev. 13: 3, to come upon this power; but this deadly wound was to be "healed."'

If that makes little sense to you, then you need to really go back and read and the study to this point and not jump in the middle expecting to understand.

The continuation of today's study will prove beyond a doubt that the deadly wound was healed… more and more prophecy coming to pass as predicted. More and more truth for us to solidify in our hearts that we can know our Savior IS returning, and we can be HIS, we must be HIS through His love, His sacrifice, by HIS grace and mercy!

Take time- read the facts… know the truth.

*******

Rev_13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

Deadly Wound to be Healed.

In 1800 another pope was elected; his palace and temporal dominion were restored, and every prerogative except, as Mr. Croly says, that of a systematic persecutor, was again under his control; and thus the wound was healed. But since 1870, he has enjoyed no prestige as a temporal prince, among the nations of the earth.

Something that we've seen change ourselves over the years. With Pope John Paul II the Pope has truly regain prestige. There are many ambassadors to the Papacy where there never were before.

Updated history- The wound is truly well healed.

www. americanambassadors.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Publications.article&articleid=44

'United States-Vatican Diplomatic Relations: The Past and The Future

'The beginning of a new administration is a good opportunity to examine the diplomatic relations between the United States (US) and another state. This is also a good time to examine the relations between the United States and the Holy See.

The White House announced on April 6, 2001, that it was the intention of President George W. Bush to nominate Mr. James Nicholson as the next Ambassador of the United States to the Holy See. Mr. Nicholson, an alumnus of the Military Academy at West Point served as an officer in the armed forces. He subsequently graduated from law school and practiced law in the state of Colorado. In 1997, he was elected Chairman of the Republican National Committee and played a major role in the George W. Bush presidential campaign. He is a friend of the President and is well connected with the White House.

On January 10, 1984, when President Reagan announced the establishment of formal diplomatic relations with the Holy See, he appointed William A. Wilson, who had been serving as his personal representative to the Pope, as the first US Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the Holy See. Ambassador Wilson was a well known business executive from California.

The second US Ambassador was Frank Shakespeare, who had been Director of the US Information Agency (USIA) and Ambassador to Portugal. He was also an activist in public affairs.

Dr. Thomas Patrick Melady, appointed by President George H. W. Bush as the third Ambassador, served from 1989 to 1993. He was a former University President, US Ambassador and an Assistant Secretary for Post Secondary Education.

President Clinton appointed in the spring of 1993, the Hon. Raymond Flynn, who was mayor of Boston and a former head of the Association of US urban mayors. The Hon. Corinne (Lindy) Boggs, widow of Hale Boggs, Speaker of the House, succeeded him in 1997. She also served for nine terms in the US Congress.

The appointment of national figures to this position started in the personal representative period. President Roosevelt appointed Myron Taylor, retired Chairman of the US Steel Corporation, as his personal representative in 1939. President Nixon appointed Henry Cabot Lodge and President Carter selected Robert F. Wagner, a former mayor of New York City.

Early History

In the first years of the United States, the new Republic had contacts with the Papal States. During that period, Papal authority extended over the territory of central Italy. However, the recognition by the United States did not include any perception of the Holy See and its unique international personality.

The consular relations established by the United States in March 1797 with the Papal States, whose capital was Rome, were reciprocated at the same consular level in 1826 when the Papal States established a consulate in New York City. President James Polk proposed in 1848 that the United States extend formal de jure recognition to the Papal States and appointed a Chargé d'Affaires. Mr. Jacob I. Martin presented his credentials to the Pope Pius IX in Rome on August 19, 1848. Mr. Martin was followed in a period of nineteen years by five other diplomats. They were: Lewis Cass, Jr., 1849-1858; John P. Stockton, 1858-1861; Alexander W. Randell, 1861-1862; Richard M. Blatchford, 1862-1863; and, Rufus King, 1863-1867.

Rufus King was the last minister resident to the Papal States. He left his post in August 1867. Beginning in that year, it would not have been possible to fund such a diplomatic post, as Congress in that year prohibited the financing of any diplomatic post to the Papal authority. Furthermore, with the incorporation of the Papal States into Italy (following Garibaldi's unification of Italy and virtual imprisonment of Pius IX), the United States would not have had a basis for its recognition, since control of territory was an intrinsic part of its original recognition of the Papal States. The international personality role of the Holy See and the unique role of the Pope himself were not part of the act of US recognition (at that time).

Mr. King's departure from Rome in 1867 initiated a long interregnum of seventy-two years when the United States did not have a diplomatic representative to the Pope. There was little or no indication that this absence of diplomatic contact would end until the Franklin Roosevelt Administration launched the concept of a "personal representative of the President." It is interesting to note that the long absence of diplomatic representation coincided with the period of strong anti-Catholicism in the United States. It was a time when an increasing number of immigrants from predominantly Catholic countries were arriving, and there was a strong negative reaction against the Irish, the French, the Italians, the Spanish and the Germans-all those from predominantly Catholic countries. The literature at the time was full of highly intemperate and in many cases vicious characterization of the leadership of the Catholic Church. It is hard to imagine that there could be any kind of approval by the US Congress for a diplomatic representative to the Pope under the circumstances of late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in the United States.

The question of the sovereignty of the Vatican City State was cleared up in 1929. The Lateran Treaty of that year established that the Republic of Italy recognized the sovereignty of the Vatican City State.

Personal Representative to the Pope

President Roosevelt announced on December 24, 1939, that he intended to send a personal representative to the Pope. The same announcement also included the news that he wanted closer contacts with the leaders of the major faiths. Thus, on Christmas Eve 1939, he informed the President of the Federal Council of Churches of Christ and the President of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America that he would be maintaining contact with them on ways to promote peace.

The appointment to the Protestant and Jewish organizations were cover operations for the real plan that Roosevelt had in mind: US diplomatic contacts with the Vatican in Rome.

There was considerable opposition in the United States to this action of President Roosevelt. Since the appointment did not require Senate approval, there was no way to focus a national campaign against it. Some of the opposition was rooted in sincere concern about the constitutional implications of the appointment.

Few took the pains to point out that the recognition of other state leaders, who also had important roles as heads of Churches or religious leaders, such as (at that time) the Emperor of Japan, the King of Saudi Arabia, the Emperor of Ethiopia and the British Monarch did not prevent their recognition as leaders of sovereign states.

And there was the clear case of unabashed anti-Catholicism. In 1939, Catholics were not members of the American political power establishment. But President Roosevelt appreciated the geopolitical significance of the Vatican and pushed through his appointment of Myron Taylor, retired corporate leader and an Episcopal lay leader. President Roosevelt's special representative arrived in Rome when Nazi Germany was scoring victories on the war front in 1940.

Taylor in Rome

Mr. Taylor, once he arrived in Rome, was regarded as the US Ambassador. He served for ten years, which covered the World War II period. Taylor had easy access to the Pope and, of course, top Vatican officials. His office was a source of important information to the United States. He was able to influence the Holy See in 1945 to immediately recognize the dangers of the communist Soviet Union expansion.

Following the retirement of Myron Taylor, President Truman decided to open up a full Embassy of the United States to the Vatican. He nominated General Mark Clark as the US Ambassador in 1951.

Opposition to the nomination mounted quickly. The opposition did not focus on the credentials of General Clark but on the recognition of a "Church" by the US government. The Truman Administration did not do well in explaining the existence of the Vatican City State as a sovereign state.

The high emotional overtones of the opposition were sufficient to torpedo the attempt to establish full diplomatic relations between the United States and the Papal authority.

In 1952, President Truman decided not to summit the nomination of General Clark to the formal confirmation process. Another 18 years would pass before a US President would attempt to name any kind of diplomat to the Vatican.

President Nixon broke the long interregnum in 1969 and appointed Henry Cabot Lodge as his personal representative, and President Carter sent a former New York City mayor to the Vatican.

Action by President Reagan

Within months of President Reagan's inaugural in 1981, it became known that he was looking into the challenges of establishing full diplomatic relations with the Vatican. One of the first steps taken by President Reagan was to obtain the repeal of the 1868 law which prohibited the expenditure of funds for an Embassy to the Vatican. He was successful in obtaining the repeal. There was no real opposition, and this was interpreted as a favorable sign for those who favored full diplomatic relations.

President Reagan moved quickly and on January 10, 1984, announced that full diplomatic relations between the United States and the Vatican had been established. The President did this over the opposition of the office of the Secretary of State.

What a difference 32 years could make! In 1952 there were demonstrations and loud opposition. In 1984, there were few manifestations against the Vatican or Catholicism. The nomination of Ambassador Wilson was approved by a landslide vote.

Since the Senate vote in 1984, there has been no opposition in the Senate to subsequent nominations. Several attempts were made to challenge the establishment of diplomatic relations in the courts; they were unsuccessful.

When Ambassador Lindy Boggs, the very popular fifth US Ambassador, took leave of her duties as Ambassador on March 1, 2001, 174 states recognized the Holy See. The structures of US-Vatican diplomatic relations are safe and sound.

Opposition to the diplomatic role of the Holy See appeared on another front in 2000. A group of individuals and organizations attempted to influence the United Nations (UN) to reduce the status of the Observer Mission of the Holy See to that of a non-governmental organization (NGO). There was an avalanche of support for the Holy See to support its Observer status at the United Nations.

One of those speaking strongly in favor of the Holy See role at the UN was the Hon. George W. Bush, then the Governor of Texas. It is widely believed that the new Ambassador representing President George W. Bush, will begin his duties at the Vatican with a warm and welcoming reception.'

*

And today in 2022- we know for a fact that the Papacy is held in very high regard. The Pope visited the USA in 2015, and He continues to be very visible on the political/religious world stage as a man of great influence. The system of the Papacy put into place is described without a doubt in prophetic history as a tool of Satan. To many those words would make me a heretic worthy of condemnation- those who are deceived. God help us all to study! Not just hold fast to our cherished beliefs and traditions! Study to know ONLY TRUTH!

God help us all!

*

Yes. The deadly wound is healed.

Daniel Chapter 7 Pt 6

 Continuing with the explanation of the prophetic Fourth Beast in Daniel 7 - the Little Horn in particular.

Dan 7:25  And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. 

A Time and Times and the Dividing of Time

"And they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time." The pronoun they embraces the saints, the times, and the laws just mentioned. How long a time were they to be given into the hands of this power? 

(The following is a rather detailed, fact-filled explanation for the meaning of a time and times and the dividing of time. Please take the time to read this simply because these are people more competent in language, unless you too are a Biblical expert.)

A time, as we have seen from chapter 4: 23, is one year; two times, the least that could be denoted by the plural, two years, and the dividing of time, or half a time (Sept., hmisu) half a year. Gesenius also gives " [the same in Chald.,] a half. Dan. 7: 25." 

We thus have three years and a half for the continuance of this power. 

The Hebrew, or rather the Chaldaic, word for time in the text before us, is iddan, which Gesenius defines thus: "Time. Spec. in prophetic language for a year. Dan. 7: 25, for a year, also two years and half a year; i. e., for three years and a half; comp. Jos. B. J. 1. 1. 1." 

We must now consider that we are in the midst of symbolic prophecy; hence in this measurement the time is not literal, but symbolic also. The inquiry then arises, How long a period is denoted by the three years and a half of prophetic time? The rule given us in the Bible is, that when a day is used as a symbol, it stands for a year. Eze. 4: 6; Num. 14: 34. 

Under the Hebrew word for day (yom), Gesenius has this remark: " 3. Sometimes [Yamim] marks a definite space of time; viz., a year; as also Syr. and Chald. [iddan] denotes both time and year; and as in English several words signifying time, weight, measure, are likewise used to denote certain specified times, weights, and measures." 

The ordinary Jewish year, which must be used as the basis of 'reckoning, contained three hundred and sixty days. 

Three years and a half contained twelve hundred and sixty days. 

As each day stands for a year, we have twelve hundred and sixty years for the continuation of the supremacy of this horn. 

Did the papacy possess dominion that length of time? The answer again is, Yes. 

The edict of the emperor Justinian, dated A. D. 533, made the bishop of Rome the head of all the churches. But this edict could not go into effect until the Arian 0strogoths, the last of the three horns that were plucked up to make room for the papacy, were driven from Rome; and this was not accomplished, as already shown, till A. D. 538.

The edict would have been of no effect had this latter event not been accomplished; hence from this latter year we are to reckon, as this was the earliest point where the saints were in reality in the hand of this power. 

From this point did the papacy hold supremacy for twelve hundred and sixty years? - Exactly. For 538 + 1260 = 1798; and in the year 1798, Berthier, with a French army, entered Rome, proclaimed a republic, took the pope prisoner, and for a time abolished the papacy. It has never since enjoyed the privileges and immunities which it possessed before. 

Note: This was true as to the writing from which this study is based upon made in 1897, however, the papacy has been fully re-established to its former power "the deadly wound" is now fully healed as of the reign Mussolini in Italy around 1929.] Thus again this power fulfils to the very letter the specifications of the prophecy, which proves beyond question that the application is correct. 

Also to note, while the Papacy today (2022) is powerful with influence, political and religious, it is not the same as it was before 1798. There was a time even in our country (the United States) that to be Catholic wasn't a great thing. Protestants fled to this country to get away from religious persecution. The Reformation in the 1500's and onward, resulting in the Protestant Religion- those protesting against Catholicism- evolving into many different denominations, but all opposed to Catholicism.  Today Catholicism has one of the largest number of believers- proving that the deadly wound dealt to the papacy was healed over. The papacy today is revered by many of ALL different faiths. 

Dan 7:26  But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. 

The Judgment Shall Sit.

After describing the terrible career of the little born, and stating that the saints should be given into his hand for 1260 years, bringing us down to 1798, verse 26 declares: "But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end." In verse 10 of the same chapter we have substantially the same expression relative to the judgment- " The judgment was set." It would seem consistent to suppose that the same judgment is referred to in both instances. But the sublime scene described in verse 10 is the opening of the investigative Judgment in the sanctuary in heaven, as will appear in remarks on Dan. 8: 14 and 9: 25 27. The opening of this judgment scene is located by the prophecy at the close of the great prophetic period of 2300 years, which terminated in 1844. Four years after this, in 1848, the great revolution which shook so many thrones in Europe, drove the pope also from his dominions. His restoration shortly after was through the force of foreign bayonets, by which alone he was upheld till his final loss of temporal power in 1870. The overthrow of the papacy in 1798 marked the conclusion of the prophetic period of 1260 years, and constituted the "deadly wound " prophesied in Rev. 13: 3, to come upon this power; but this deadly wound was to be "healed."

To be continued….