The Proof Is In the Pudding.

 Proof is in the pudding. Meaning? If you are presented with pudding whether it is a good or bad pudding, only eating it will tell the tale. If you take a spoonful of pudding and it's good, there's your proof. If you take a spoonful of pudding and it's bad, again, there is your proof of it's being a bad tasting pudding. Simply looking at the pudding doesn't necessarily mean it's a good pudding. It's truly only when one partakes of the pudding they'll know factually it's not good. I've watched a baking show and on the show there is a constant happenstance- bakers will make of visual mess of the item being baked, yet it will taste fantastic-  substance ruled over style. And the opposite occurred quite often as well. A fantastic appearing bake tasted absolutely awful- style over substance. When you get the proof it's really in the tasting. The judges of the show would rather have both style and substance, but barring that occurring they are much more pleased by the taste-the substance of a bake than its style. They want to be able to enjoy eating what is presented. The proof is in the pudding.  What's this all have to do with our current study from the book- From Eden to Eden- An Historic and Prophetic Study-?  A lot. 

The proof is in the studying. The proof is in the history. The proof is in the prophecy.

If we neglect to partake of the study, history, prophecy we will not be nourished as we should be.  We can have all the style we want, but we need the substance, we can't neglect the substance, not when the very God we worship tells us we are blessed to study prophecy!  If you won't even taste the pudding of prophecy to find the proof in the pudding, you are rejecting God's word. 

Be blessed- study prophecy!  

God help us all to KNOW Him and do His will now and always!!!!!!!

All through Jesus Christ our Lord, now and forever! Amen!!!!!!!

*******

CHAPTER XI. THE BEAST WITH SEVEN HEADS AND TEN HORNS

The twelfth and thirteenth chapters of the Revelation so naturally follow the seventh of Daniel that some facts in Daniel's prophecy are passed over for the present, in order to follow out this chain. The thirteenth chapter of Revelation is, indeed, the complement of the seventh of Daniel; but a brief notice of Revelation 12 is necessary as preliminary to the study of chapter 13.

In chapter 12 are presented two prominent objects:--

1. A woman, which is a symbol of the church of Christ. She was clothed with the sun--the rising glory of the new, or gospel, dispensation. And the moon was under her feet--the paler glory of the dispensation just passing away. All the institutions of the Mosaic economy borrowed their light from the coming Messiah, the Son of God, the antitype of all its sacrifices, as the moon borrows her light from the sun. She had a crown of twelve stars--the twelve apostles of the Lamb. That this woman represented the church of God is evident from this circumstance, that to the woman was born a son, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron, and who was caught up to God and his throne. This will apply to the Lord Jesus Christ and to no one else. Again, in the seventeenth chapter of this

book, a woman represents the apostate church, the church of antichrist. Thus the two churches--that of Christ and that of antichrist--are represented by women. 

2. The other prominent object in this chapter is a great red dragon. Two views are held in regard to this: (1) That the dragon is Satan. This view has this advantage, that the dragon is called the devil and Satan in verse 9, and is there represented as the leader of the angels that fought against Michael, who is the Archangel, Jude 9, and his angels. And also the devil, or Satan, is called the dragon in chapter 20:2. This certainly seems decisive. (2) It is held that the dragon is a symbol of pagan Rome. In favor of this view is presented the appearance of the dragon, having seven heads and ten horns. These heads and horns are elsewhere used as symbols, and they certainly do not belong to the devil literally. Such is not the personal appearance of the devil.

Doubtless there is truth in both these views, and the whole truth seems to be comprised in the two. There is great uniformity of belief among the best authors that Satan is addressed directly as "king of Tyrus," in Eze. 28:12-19, while the reigning monarch was called the prince of Tyrus. Verses 1-10. Tyre was the great seat of commerce, the mart of nations; her merchants were princes, her traffickers the honorable of the earth. Isa. 23:3, 8. And her wickedness corresponded to her wealth and her greatness. She was Satan's chief instrument and representative in the days of her prosperity. And also of Rome. What nation or city ever served Satan so faithfully and so successfully as Rome? For many centuries it was the very seat of his service and his power. Cruelty and licentiousness were the characteristics of her people, from king to slave, under all phases of her dominion. Of this we are assured by history, yet how few of the crimes of her mighty men have come down through history. Under the circumstances, we see no difficulty in representing Satan as that old serpent, the dragon, and then letting the dragon stand as his chief representative--pagan Rome.

The dragon sought to put the man child to death as soon as he was born. An effort was put forth to slay the infant Jesus in Bethlehem. In this effort all the children of Bethlehem two years old and under were put to death--an act worthy of Satan himself. But it was committed under the order of a Roman king; and the Lord Jesus was finally put to death by another Roman king. The dragon then Persecuted the woman; he continued his persecution during the time and times and half, though she was protected from his power; and he will also persecute the remnant of her seed, the very last state of the church, "which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Rev. 12:17. Compare chap. 19:10. 

These facts prove that the dragon does not leave the field of action while time endures. In Rev. 13:1, 2 is described the rise and appearance of a beast, in the following words:--

"And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion; and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority."

By comparing this beast with the beasts in Dan. 7:1-7 it will be seen that it contains all the main features of all the beasts of that chapter. All rose out of the sea. In Rev. 17:15 waters are shown to represent the multitudes of people. It will yet be seen that there is a contrast presented on this point: they did not grow up; the powers they represent were not built up; they rose up by conquest and strivings among the nations.

The description of this beast gives the order the reverse of that in Daniel 7, because the two prophets stood at opposite ends of the chain. John said the beast was like unto a leopard--the third beast of Daniel 7, the symbol of the Grecian kingdom. His feet were as the feet of a bear--the second beast of Daniel, the kingdom of the Medes and the Persians. And his mouth was as the mouth of a lion--the first beast of Daniel, Babylon. Thus far the likeness is complete. But this is not all. The beast had seven heads and ten horns. There is no question ever raised against the idea that these horns are the same powers that are represented by the horns on the fourth beast of Daniel 7. Thus all the four beasts combine in this. But no theory which has ever been published concerning these heads fully satisfies the prophecy, but that does not hinder our identifying the beast itself. A comparison of its work, the time of its continuance, etc., with the same features of the "little horn" of Daniel 7, is sufficient to settle beyond all controversy that the two symbols represent the same power.

Can we see any object in the prophecy thus giving to this beast every prominent feature of those beasts? Certainly we can. This beast is the actual heir to the dominion held by those four beasts. An objection against this has been offered to the intent that the dominion of the popes was so limited that it cannot be said that they inherited the dominion of the great monarchies. This objection is based on wrong views of the papal power, as to both its nature and extent. On this point verse 2 says, "And the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority." This is very important ground and should be very carefully examined.

First, what is meant by the expression, "the supremacy of the papacy"? In what did the strength of the papal power consist? The word supremacy is a proper word to use in reference to the power of the popes, but not in regard to their civil power. This was not only quite limited, but variable and uncertain. Indeed, civil power is not necessary to the existence of the papacy, as all know; neither is it necessary to the exercise of the largest power ever exercised by the popes. The possession of civil power gives prestige in a certain sense, as the pope is thereby classed among kings, no matter how small his territory, and it brings him into closer relations to other governments. But it must be borne in mind that the popes never exercised power over kings by virtue of their own kingship, but always by reason of their priesthood. They never pretended to control kings, or to absolve subjects from their allegiance, by reason of their kingly power, but as being successors of St. Peter--as vicars of Christ upon earth. They claimed that, as all power was given to Christ in Heaven and upon earth, so must his vicar, the one who holds that power on earth, have a right to exercise all that power. 

Pope Symmachus said to the emperor of the East, that the pope was as much superior to an emperor as heavenly things are superior to earthly things. This was an admission on his part, that his supremacy was altogether in his spiritual authority; but the popes chose to overlook the acknowledged fact that their power as temporal princes took so much from their exalted position, as it made them ministers of merely earthly things in their priesthood. This is the logical conclusion, from the position assumed by Symmachus, though it is not the manner in which it has been viewed. And it should also be borne in mind that, at the time of Symmachus, he did not claim, or even directly aspire to, the exercise of civil power. It was in their spiritual power alone that their strength and supremacy consisted. Their anathemas, their curses of kings, their control over the subjects of kings, were all by virtue of their assumed power as the high priests of the kingdom of Christ. This was exercised without any regard to the extent of their territorial jurisdiction as civil rulers, or even to the existence of such jurisdiction.

We have been thus particular on this point, as it is one of great importance. The extent of papal power deserves special attention. Because the beginning of the civil power of the papacy is veiled in considerable obscurity, it has been argued that we cannot point with certainty to any particular time for the setting up  of the papacy. But this is not correct. Examining this subject with care, we shall find that four steps were taken, and only four, which fully established the power of the popes; and these steps are readily identified.

 

First, conferring the primacy upon the bishop of Rome, which was done bythe Council of Nice, and confirmed by the royal commissioners. Because the title did not, at that time, carry with it any great weight, or confer any particular power, some have thought that the primacy, as then established, did not amount to much. But they overlook the nature of the hierarchy as established by Constantine, and the consequences that naturally grew out of this gift. Bower gives a minute account of the church establishment, and from this some extracts are here given. He first describes the churches in their original independence, and their councils, being voluntary meetings, "there being no Christian magistrates in those days to convene synods." It is a fact that from the Council of Nice onwards, the magistrates convened synods and councils. Before the emperor took the headship of the national church, there was no earthly head of the church recognized. Bower says:--

"Such was the hierarchy, such the government of the church, during the first three centuries. But in the fourth and following ages great alterations were made in both, the church adapting her government to that of the State, namely, to the new form of government introduced by Constantine, who had taken the priesthood under his immediate protection. For it was in his reign that the titles of Patriarchs, Exarchs, Metropolitans, were first heard of, or at least had any power, authority, or privileges, annexed to them. That this conformity between the civil and ecclesiastical polity may appear more plainly, I shall premise a succinct account of the former, as established by Constantine throughout the empire." Here follows a description of the organization of the empire into prefectures, dioceses, provinces, with proconsuls, vicars, consulars, correctors, and presidents. "Each diocese had its metropolis, and likewise each province contained in the diocese." He continues:--

"Now, if we compare the civil polity thus described, with the ecclesiastical, we shall find them in most places answering each other, in every respect, and one bishop raised above the rest, according to the rank that was given in this new division to the city in which he presided. Thus, for instance, the chief cities of the five dioceses of the oriental prefecture were--Antioch, the metropolis of the oriental diocese; Alexandria, of the Egyptian; Ephesus, of the Asiatic; Cesarea, of the Pontic; and Heraclea, of the Thracian. Now the bishops of these cities, in regard of the eminence of their sees, were exalted above all other bishops, and distinguished with the title of exarchs; nay, and by degrees they acquired, not to say usurped, a kind of authority and jurisdiction over the bishops of the inferior sees, which was afterwards confirmed to them by several councils. In like manner, the bishops of the metropolis of each province was, on account of the dignity of his see, honored with the title of metropolitan, to which were annexed certain privileges, of which I shall speak hereafter." 

After further remarks and descriptions, he adds the following significant passage:--

"However, the power of the bishop of Rome far exceeded, within the bounds of his jurisdiction, that of other metropolitans, as I shall show." History of the Popes, under Sylvester.

Another historian makes the following remarks:--

"The bishop of Rome took precedence over all others of the episcopal order. Nor was this pre-eminence founded solely on popular feeling and a prejudice of long standing, sprung from various causes; but also on those grounds which commonly give priority and greatness in the estimation of mortals. For he exceeded all other bishops in the amplitude and splendor of the church over which he presided, in the magnitude of his revenues and possessions, in the number of his ministers of various descriptions, in the weight of his influence with the people at large, and in the sumptuousness and magnificence of his style of living. These marks of power and worldly greatness were so fascinating to the minds of Christians even in this age, that often most obstinate and bloody

contests took place at Rome when a new pontin was to be created by the suffrages of the priests and people." Murdock's Mosheim, Ecclesiastical History, Book 2, Cent. 4, Part 2, chap. 2, sec. 5 (London, 1845).

Now, inasmuch as the bishops were possessed of power and dignity according to the rank of the city over which they presided, as Bower says, especial dignity and the primacy were given to the bishop of Rome, because it was the imperial city. And every step in the transformation of the pagan empire into the papal empire, proves that the higher honor conferred upon the bishop of Rome, was not because of any supposed primacy of Peter, or of any other apostle, but solely because of the imperial rank of the city. The Council of Chalcedon proceeded to confer prerogatives upon the bishop of Constantinople, against which the Roman delegates protested, as encroachments upon the primacy of Rome. The imperial commissioners who heard the plea, thus decided:--

"From the whole discussion, and from what has been brought forward on either side, we acknowledge that the primacy over all and the most eminent rank are to continue with the archbishop of old Rome." Schaff, Church History, Vol. 2, p. 281.

Considering that the church was just as extensive as the empire, that its officers corresponded to those of the several divisions or provinces of the empire, "the primacy over all and the most eminent rank" no longer appears to be an unimportant matter; and yet more especially, when we consider the other steps that were taken in connection with it, or soon after. 

Second, Constantine conferred certain civil privileges and powers upon the bishops, and, as usual, the highest upon the bishops of Rome. Sozomen gives the following testimony on this subject:--

"Constantine likewise enacted a law in favor of the clergy, permitting judgment to be passed by the bishops when litigants preferred appealing to them rather than to the secular court; he enacted that their decree should be valid, and as far superior to that of other judges as if pronounced by the emperor himself; that the governor and subordinate military officers should see to the execution of these decrees; and that sentence, when passed by them, should be irreversible." Ecclesiastical History, chap. 2.

It was not an idle expression of Stanley when he called the bishop of Rome "the chief Christian magistrate." All the bishops were elevated by this decree, but the bishop of Rome had the highest rank and primacy over all. Thus two important steps were taken, tending directly to the exaltation of the bishop of the imperial city; to him was given the primacy and the chief rank, and he was a civil magistrate with great authority. But little foresight were needed to anticipate the result of such steps, especially taken in connection with those which followed.

Third, Constantine removed the seat of empire from Rome to Constantinople. Following the others, this step opened the way for the gratification of the most unbounded ambition of the Roman bishop. Of the effect of this step, Stanley says:--

"According to the fable of Sylvester, Constantine retired to Greece in order to leave Italy for the pope--'per cedera al pastor si fece Creco.' So said the legend, and it was undoubtedly the case that, by retiring to the East, he left the field clear for the bishop of Rome In the absence of the emperors from Rome, the chief Christian magistrate rose to new importance. When the Barbarians broke upon Italy, the pope thus became the representative of the ancient republic. It is one of the many senses in which the saying of Hobbes is true, that the papacy is but the ghost of the deceased Roman empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof." 

In a paragraph already quoted, Machiavel attributes the downfall of the Western Roman Empire to this removal of the capital. A work entitled, "A Concise History of the Papal Supremacy," published in Dublin, 1810, takes a most rational view of this move of Constantine. It says:--

"It is most certain that if the emperors had continued to reside at Rome, its bishops never would have usurped a supremacy." 

This fact is so evident that it is useless to multiply words in proof. The removal of the capital not only opened the way before the bishop of Rome, but the result was almost inevitable, that with the primacy over the whole church as extensive as the empire itself, and a civil magistracy of a very high grade in his hands, with possessions and revenues above all others, presiding in the imperial city, he must of necessity rise to great worldly importance when the emperors removed their throne as remote as to Constantinople, and the empire itself was beset on every hand by invading armies, and the emperors unable to afford relief. The emperors had before taken up their residences temporarily outside of the city of Rome; but this was a permanent removal, an entire resignation of the true seat of the empire. Thus far was the scripture fulfilled: "The dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority."

To be continued…

(From Eden to Eden-A Historic and Prophetic Study. By J. H. Waggoner. 1890.)

Proof.

 Wonderful history.  I say wonderful because it is knowledge that we are given and it proves prophecy.  "Proof, I want proof! Proof, I need proof! Give me proof! I will not believe without proof!"   And then… proof is offered and the tune changes.  "Your proof isn't good enough. Your proof is subjective. Your proof isn't real. You can't prove your proof."  The fact of the matter is, if someone does not want to believe they will not believe even if you give them proof. What is truly irrefutable, to them is nothing but lies because that is what they want to believe and nothing can change the belief of someone who is convicted deeply- even if that conviction is a bunch of lies. Deception is horrific. Eve was deceived. Eve was told lies by Satan and she chose to believe them because she was deceived.  Eve didn't go into the vicinity of the forbidden tree, reach up of her own accord and pluck a fruit and bite into it, she didn't. Satan was there and he wasn't a whisper in her ear but a presence, a creature of beauty, a speaking creature that used all his guile to deceive her. We have no way of knowing but it's possible she'd been around the creature Satan was possessing, remember he was a fallen angel! Deception then and deception now, Satan will take as many people down with him as possible. God help us all!

All through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, now and forever. Amen!

*******

CHAPTER X. "ANOTHER LITTLE HORN."

(SKIP this following recap of the study from the last couple days and go down to START HERE if you've already been reading.)

If you read yesterday's study then you know I spoke of the puzzle pieces of prophecy and the large overview of prophecy being considered a simple100 piece puzzle easy to put together, a quick work. While a detailed view of prophecy might be considered a 100,000 piece puzzle, much more difficult and time consuming. 

We are putting together the 100,000 piece prophetic picture here and there are many details. To pick up here and now you may need to go back to the previous study for context. We are discussing the details of Rome - pagan and papal, the Legs, Feet and Toes of Daniel's prophecy of the Babylonian king's dream statue.  Daniel was given subsequent visions expounding on this prophecy-  

(Daniel Chapter 7)

Verse 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."

In all the Scriptures a horn is the symbol of power, without regard to the nature of the power. And there was an extraordinary power rising into notice just at the time when Western Rome was broken into these fragments or kingdoms. 

(Daniel Chapter 7)

Verse 24 says, "He shall be diverse from the first." And this was diverse from the others in that it arose as a religious, a professedly Christian, power. Although it arose as a little horn, so that it did not at first take its place among the kingdoms of the earth, it became very strong, for its "look was more stout than its fellows." 

And it is so well known that it passes without proof, that the Romish Church kingdom became stronger than the strongest kingdoms of the earth. The heads of this system, the popes of Rome, claimed it as their right to rule over the kings, and to absolve subjects from their allegiance to any king who refused submission to their will.

To be continued…  (tomorrow we'll continue with the third horn that was plucked up by Papal Rome.) 

(START HERE) (The Third of the THREE horns that prophecy said would be plucked up by the Little Horn)

The king of the Vandals was not taken, however, until the year 535, when he was brought to grace the triumph given to Belisarius in Constantinople. Yet the tide of prosperity was not altogether smooth for Justinian in his own territory. Although the Trinitarians were free from opposition by the heretics, they could not agree among themselves as to the terms in which their faith should be expressed. In other words, they quarreled about the method of defining a doctrine which none of them understood.

And this very condition was the occasion of more strife and bloodshed than any other cause that troubled the church. The Nestorians and Justinian were in open opposition to each other, and the monks resolved to appeal to the pope, where they counted on an easy triumph, inasmuch as their definition had been declared by a preceding pope, in the same terms that they used. But Justinian appealed to the pope also; and his appeal was accompanied by the weighty argument of a gift to St. Peter, consisting of several chalices, and other vessels of gold, enriched with precious stones. This, with his confession of faith, Justinian sent to the pope, with a most obsequious letter, lauding the pope in the most courtly terms, and proceeding to declare that he, the pope, was the head of all the churches; that he, the emperor, had subjected to his see all the churches of the whole East; and that the pope was the effectual corrector of heretics. It was a trying time for the pope; it was difficult for him to declare against the express words of his predecessor, and still more difficult to decide against the emperor, and all the bishops of the East who favored him. After much consultation, had, no doubt, to avoid giving offense to those of the West, it was decided in favor of Justinian.

This was indeed an eventful time for the professed see of St. Peter. Gibbon speaks thus of the action of Justinian, after the triumph of Belisarius in Africa:--

"He received the messengers of victory at the time when he was preparing to publish the Pandects of the Roman law; and the devout or jealous emperor celebrated the divine goodness, and confessed in silence, the merit of his successful general. Impatient to abolish the temporal and spiritual tyranny of the Vandals, he proceeded, without delay, to the full establishment of the Catholic Church. 

Her jurisdiction, wealth, and immunities, perhaps the most essential part of episcopal religion, were restored and amplified with a liberal hand; the Arian worship was suppressed; the Donatist meetings were proscribed; and the synod of Carthage, by the voice of two hundred and seventeen bishops, applauded the just measure of pious retaliation." Decline and Fall, chap. xli, paragraph 11.

Belisarius was next sent to subdue the Goths in Italy. He was delayed by the jealousy and ill-will of the emperor; but he entered Rome in 536, and sent the  keys of the city to Justinian as the sign that he was master of the city. But the victory was not by any means complete, as the Barbarians under Vitiges besieged Rome with Belisarius in it. The siege lasted over a year. See Gibbon and Bower.

But the siege became disastrous and unprofitable to the Barbarians. Finally, unfavorable news from Rimini caused the Gothic leader to risk one more effort before leaving the vicinity of the city; but the attack was disastrous to the besiegers, and they retreated, not soon to return. Italy was rescued to the emperor, and the third kingdom was taken away to relieve the Catholic Church, and the popes, from their heretical masters. It is true that Barbarians from time to time renewed their efforts to recover what Belisarius had taken from them. Their retreat was in 538, at which time the letter of Justinian to Pope John I., in which all the churches were subjected to his authority, became more than a hope, which it had hitherto been to the pope, for the emperor was now able to give effect to the gracious promises which he had made to the pontiff.

The prophet Daniel said of the little horn, which came up after the ten, that before him "there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots." This we have seen was accomplished between the years 493, when Odoacer was defeated and slain, which ended the reign of the Heruli, and 538, when Italy was recovered from the Ostrogoths.

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."

Four specifications are here presented, and each has been most faithfully fulfilled by the papacy. Not a power, not a prerogative, not a title, was ever given to, or claimed by, the Most High God but has been claimed by, and given to, the pope of Rome. Indeed, under the name of "that man of sin," Paul has described him as exalting himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped. 2 Thess. 2:1-9. That he has worn out the saints of the Most High, all history attests. The Judgment-day alone will reveal the number of the victims who perished by fire, by the sword, by wild beasts, by the tortures and in the dungeons of the Inquisition. The Scriptures will never fail; the description of that power by St. Paul was written by inspiration, and has its perfect fulfillment. And what power ever fulfilled it by exalting itself as the papacy has done? What power ever wore out the saints of the Most High as that apostate church literally wore them out for long centuries? What other power ever continued long enough to hold dominion over the saints, and to make them the victims of its religious hatred and unbounded ambition, as long a time as is here given to this horn?

"And they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time."

This expression is easily explained.

In Dan. 4:16, 23, 25, and 32, the expression "seven times" is used. These seven times were to pass upon Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, during which he should be shut out of his kingdom, and live with the cattle, because of his pride. And Josephus, book 10, chap. 10, sec. 6, says that Nebuchadnezzar was driven out from his kingdom for seven years. And he is not the only authority for applying the word "time" to a year.

In other scriptures this period of three times and a half is so numbered that it is necessary to ascertain how many days we must count for a year. No exact measurement ever has been or ever can be adopted, from the fact that, in computing the days of the revolution of the earth around the sun, a fraction remains. In the course of years these fractions amount to a considerable sum--

sufficient to disarrange the seasons. For this reason intercalary periods have to be used; that is, the years are counted of unequal length, and days or longer periods are thrown in to rectify the discrepancy. In our present computation the months have no certain length, an arbitrary number of days being given to each, and the fraction remaining is nearly accounted for by adding a day to February every four years. Yet exactness requires that another be added at much longer periods.

But the computation given in the Scriptures is entirely different. Twelve months, with thirty days to the month, were counted for a year, giving a round number of three hundred and sixty days,--five less than in the present method. While we add one day to every fourth year, their deficiency being greater, they had to add longer periods, which they called a month. The twelfth month was called Adar, and the intercalated month was called Veadar--literally, And-Adar; equivalent to, Another Adar. But as we commonly call a period of three hundred and sixty-five days a year, taking no note of the intercalated days, so they called the year three hundred and sixty days, not noting the intercalated month. That thirty was the number of days counted to a month, we learn in Genesis, chapters 7 and 8.

In Gen. 7:11 it is said that the flood came upon the earth in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month. In chapter 8:4 it says the ark rested the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month. And from the seventeenth day of the second month to the seventeenth day of the seventh month is just five months. And chapter 7:24 says that the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days. An hundred and fifty days divided between five months give thirty days to the month. And twelve months of thirty days to the month make a year of three hundred and sixty days. This point is clear; a year, or a literal time, contains three hundred and sixty days.

It has already been shown that a time is equal to a year, and a time and times and half a time would make twelve hundred and sixty days. Thus: one time, three hundred and sixty days; two times, seven hundred and twenty days; and half a time, one hundred and eighty days, together equal to twelve hundred and sixty.

And this computation is verified in Revelation 12. Verse 14 says that the woman fled into the wilderness, where she was nourished for a time and times and half a time from the face of the serpent. And verse 6 says she was in the wilderness a thousand two hundred and threescore days--1260. This is the period in which the little horn had power to wear out the saints of the Most High, according to Dan.7:25. 

But 1260 days make only three and a half years, while the papacy wore out the saints for many centuries. How are we to understand this? It is true that in Daniel 4 we found that seven times made just seven years, which is literal time, because that was a period relating to the life of a single man. He was driven out from his kingdom for seven years, but that did not destroy his kingdom. It stood ready for him, and he ruled in it when his reason was restored to him. But the little horn does not represent a man or a single individual; it is the symbol of a power that stood and acted through many centuries. When applied to a symbol, time is always counted a day for a year. This rule is laid down in Eze. 4:1-6. The prophet was to represent the siege of Jerusalem, by lying as many days as the city was to be besieged years. Said the Lord, "I have appointed thee each day for a year." 

And this again is shown in Daniel 9, where seventy weeks are given unto a certain event, which are known to be weeks of years--seven years to a week. This is recognized by all. And this fact, that each day is counted for a year, answers the query about the length of time the little horn had power over the saints; it was 1260 years, instead of 1260 literal days. As this time is more particularly spoken of in the book of Revelation, the evidence as to its beginning and ending will be examined in connection with an examination of some prophecies in that book. Thus briefly have the several parts of the vision been examined; the climax, "the effect of every vision," Eze. 12:23, is again presented in verse 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."

According to the current theories of men, the saints possessed the kingdom long before this little horn arose, even before the Roman kingdom was divided. But the Scriptures always speak in a different manner. This is the period of their tribulation. Here all that live godly in Christ must suffer persecution. Here death and the grave hold them in their embrace. But a change is coming, the saints will get the victory over all their foes, and possess the kingdom forever and ever. The order of events is again given in Dan. 7:21, 22:--

"I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; 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."

This testimony is unmistakable and sure. This is the consummation of all prophecy. The saints are yet the Lord's waiting ones. The promises to Abraham and his seed have not yet been fulfilled. The meek have not yet inherited the earth; they have never had the privilege of delighting themselves in the abundance of peace in the land of Abraham's sojourning. The throne of David is not yet given to his seed, "whose right it is." He is yet seated upon the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens, expecting till his own throne--his throne by birth of the line of Judah--shall be given him. Rev. 3:21; Luke 1:32, 33. Still the longing ones, the believing ones, who wait for the fulfillment of the promises of the Lord, earnestly pray, "Thy kingdom come."

To be continued…

We Are Living Through Prophecy.

 We are living through prophecy and will continue to do so until all prophecy is completely and utterly fulfilled. You'd spend hours on entertainment, but not even a few on in-depth studying of God's word? You take one look at how long a study of prophecy and history can be when you want irrefutable proof that God's word holds true for the past and then for the future, and you're dismayed. We are going to live out prophecy, we have no choice, it's inevitable. Christ will come, just as all the other predictions have happened - one day Christ will return it's a fact not wishful or delusional thinking. Christ will find faith on earth when He returns, He will. However, compared to the multitudes there will be just a few He will find.  Why is that when so many millions and millions claim to belong to God? Because their hearts are not God's, not in truth. 

Is it easy to step away from the world of entertainment we are absorbed in? No. Is it easy to develop a love of studying God's word? No. Satan will do everything he can to see that it's very hard for us to choose to delve into God's word over all other things that truly are but distractions.  I'm not talking about spending time serving others, doing what our Lord called us to do- that is not a distraction, I'm talking senseless, non-edifying past times that will, if they can, draw us away from Christ, not towards Him.

Radical, extremist, delusional, bizarre, these are words associated with those who choose to seek God before all else. 

I'm guilty, so guilty, may God forgive me. May God help me, I'm weak, and HE is strong!

May we study and keep studying to know truth beyond doubt.

All by our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, now and forever! Amen!!!!!!!

*

CHAPTER X. "ANOTHER LITTLE HORN."

Continuing from yesterday. 

If you read yesterday's study then you know I spoke of the puzzle pieces of prophecy and the large overview of prophecy being considered a simple100 piece puzzle easy to put together, a quick work. While a detailed view of prophecy might be considered a 100,000 piece puzzle, much more difficult and time consuming. 

We are putting together the 100,000 piece prophetic picture here and there are many details. To pick up here and now you may need to go back to the previous study for context. We are discussing the details of Rome - pagan and papal, the Legs, Feet and Toes of Daniel's prophecy of the Babylonian king's dream statue.  Daniel was given subsequent visions expounding on this prophecy-  

                                                                           

(From yesterday- 

(Daniel Chapter 7)

Verse 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."

In all the Scriptures a horn is the symbol of power, without regard to the nature of the power. And there was an extraordinary power rising into notice just at the time when Western Rome was broken into these fragments or kingdoms. 

(Daniel Chapter 7)

Verse 24 says, "He shall be diverse from the first." And this was diverse from the others in that it arose as a religious, a professedly Christian, power. Although it arose as a little horn, so that it did not at first take its place among the kingdoms of the earth, it became very strong, for its "look was more stout than its fellows." 

And it is so well known that it passes without proof, that the Romish Church kingdom became stronger than the strongest kingdoms of the earth. The heads of this system, the popes of Rome, claimed it as their right to rule over the kings, and to absolve subjects from their allegiance

to any king who refused submission to their will.

Continued…

Under Felix II.

"From this law," says Bower, "it is manifest that great abuses must have prevailed at this time in Rome, in the management of the goods belonging to the church."

Indeed, it was well known that candidates for the chair of St. Peter had freely pledged the property of the church to procure votes in the "sacred college" where an infallible successor to St. Peter was to be chosen.

This might be called the first great humiliation that the popes of Rome were compelled to bear at the hands of an Arian king. Felix II. filled the papal chair by tolerance of Odoacer, and under restrictions placed upon him by one whom he esteemed an accursed heretic; for the law, read by order of the king, restrained the newly-elected pope, as well as his successors, from a practice which had been common with his predecessors. 

If any think that this was not a humiliation to one occupying the papal chair, let him read the life of Leo the Great, and consider what was already claimed as the right and proper authority of him who filled that position. As long as the Heruli possessed Italy, so long must the pope consider himself under the hateful supervision of those who were held to be enemies to the church and to the true faith. But to remedy this state of things was not an easy matter. 

From the time of Constantine, the emperors had assumed the oversight of the church, and the bishops, especially of Rome, the chief city of the empire, were elected and installed only by imperial consent. 

When the Barbarians ruled in Italy, their kings assumed the same right; and indeed, it became necessary for them to take the control of the important matters of the church, that the peace of the kingdom might be preserved. As Gibbon said, the peace of the city required their interposition. But it was irritating in the extreme to the ambitious popes, that they must hold their seats under the restraints imposed by a heretical king. 

True, they were not at all restrained from exercising jurisdiction in all matters spiritual; but that was not all that they demanded. But for the time being their demands were not only unheeded, but held in check. Of course it became an object to all who were of the Catholic faith, to have Italy freed from the rule of the Heruli. 

Bower says that Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths, then reigning in Pannonia, had served under the emperor, but "afterwards, thinking himself ill-used by that prince, not only quitted his service, but, at the head of his Goths, made war on the empire, till he was persuaded by the emperor to turn his arms against Odoacer, who reigned in Italy." Vol. 1, p. 283, note. Zeno, who was weak and inefficient, served a twofold purpose in turning Theodoric against the Heruli. Machiavel, in his "History of Florence," thus stated the case:--

"Zeno, partly by apprehension and partly wishing to drive Odoacer from Italy, consented that he should go against him and take possession of Italy. Theodoric immediately started from his States, where he left the Gepides, people with whom he was on friendly terms, and having come into Italy, he killed Odoacer, with his son; and according to the already established custom, he took the title of king of Italy." Vol. 1, pp. 15, 16, French edition of Desborkes, Amsterdam, 1694.

  

Zeno was orthodox, that is, in full sympathy with the Roman pontiff, and by his connivance, one of the ten kingdoms was plucked up, and an important step was thus taken to free the pope from Arian domination.

 But, although it was absolutely necessary that the king of the Heruli should be removed, it was soon found that one dictator of the pope was vanquished to give place to another. Theodoric, as had Odoacer before him, in no manner opposed the free action of the Roman bishop in any matter coming legitimately under the jurisdiction of the spiritual head of the church. But he took the same oversight of the church, and compelled the orthodox to do justice to the Arians, who were being subjected to severe persecutions by Justin, the emperor of the East, who was as inefficient as Zeno before him, and more radical in his devotion to the Catholic cause. This brings us to the second humiliation of the popes by the Arians.

Gibbon attributes this persecution, not to Justin but to Justinian, who was already associated in the government. The conduct of Justinian when he became emperor fully justifies the judgment of the historians. These are his words:--

"After the death of Anastasius, the diadem had been placed on the head of a feeble old man; but the powers of government were assumed by his nephew Justinian, who already meditated the extirpation of heresy, and the conquest of Italy and Africa. A rigorous law, which was published at Constantinople, to reduce the Arians by the dread of punishment within the pale of the church, awakened the just resentment of Theodoric, who claimed for his distressed brethren of the East the same indulgence which he had so long granted to the Catholics of his dominions. At his stern command, the Roman pontiff, with four illustrious senators, embarked on an embassy, of which he must have alike dreaded the failure or the success." Decline and Fall, chap. 39, paragraph 17.

In reading the above it must be borne in mind that, though Justinian was publicly proclaimed associate emperor only four months before the death of Justin, "the powers of government were assumed" by him, as Gibbon says, before that time; he really controlled affairs under his superannuated uncle. Bower has given a minute account of the embassy of Pope John I. to the

court of Constantinople. The Arians in the East appealed to Theodoric to procure, if possible, a mitigation of the horrors into which they were consigned by the action of the emperor. Theodoric was too humane to retaliate without an effort to have the edict reversed by more gentle means. But by what means his purpose could be accomplished, it was difficult to determine. Bower says:--

"He thought of many; weighed and examined many; and at last fixed upon one, which he apprehended could not fail of the wished-for success. He knew what weight the advice and counsels of the pope had with the emperor; how much the emperor deferred to the judgment of the bishop of Rome, in all matters of religion and conscience; and therefore did not doubt that the persecution would soon be at an  end, could the pope by any means be prevailed upon to espouse the cause of the persecuted Arians." 

"The king was sensible that it was only by menaces, by force, and compulsion, that the pope could be brought to act such a part; and resolved, accordingly, to employ them at once, that no room might be left for delays and excuses. Having therefore sent for him to Ravenna, he complained to him with great warmth of the unchristian spirit and proceedings of the emperor; . . . comparing the happy situation of the heretics, meaning the Catholics in his dominion, with the unhappy condition of the Catholics in those of the emperor, he added: 'But I must let you know that I am determined not to sit as an idle spectator on such an occasion. I am, you know, and I have often declared it, an enemy to all kinds of persecution; I have suffered not only the inhabitants of Italy, but even my Goths, to embrace and profess, undisturbed, which of the two religions they thought the most pleasing to God; and, in the distribution of my favors, have hitherto made no distinction between Catholic and heretic. But if the emperor does not change his measures, I must change mine. Men of other religions the emperor may treat as he pleases, though every man has a right to serve the Creator in the manner which he thinks the most acceptable to him. But as for those who profess the same religion which I profess, I think myself bound to employ the power which it has pleased God to put into my hands for their defense and protection. If the emperor therefore does not think fit to evoke the edict, which he has lately issued against those of my persuasion, it is my firm resolution to issue the like edict against those of his; and to see it every where executed with the same rigor. Those who do not profess the faith of Nice are heretics to him; and those who do are heretics to me. Whatever can excuse and justify his severity to the former will excuse and justify mine to the latter. But the emperor,' continued the king, 'has none about him who dare freely and openly speak what they think, or to whom he would hearken if they did. But the great veneration which he professes for your see leaves no room to doubt but he would hearken to you. I will therefore have you to repair forthwith to Constantinople, and there to remonstrate both in my name and your own, against the violent measures in which that court has so rashly engaged. It is in your power to divert the emperor from them; and till you have, nay, till the Catholics, the Arians, are restored to the free exercise of their religion, and to all the churches from which they have been driven, you must not think of returning to Italy.'" History of the Popes, under John I.  

 

Some authors say that there was a disagreement between the pope and the king in regard to the terms of the embassy, and that the king took him prisoner, and was about to convey him away. Bower says: "However that may be, certain it is that the pope undertook the embassy, not out of any kindness to the Arians, with which he has been by some unjustly reproached, but to divert the storm that threatened the Catholics in his dominions." 

And, in all the history of Rome, this is the only occasion on which her bishops ever endeavored to mitigate the cruelty of persecutions against those whom they considered heretics. And in this embassy, though he procured a reversal of the inhuman edict of the emperor, the evidence points towards a conspiracy against the king for the overthrow of the Arians, for the pope was made a prisoner on his return. Some, however, think that his imprisonment was caused by a failure to procure all that Theodoric required in the way of justice to the Arians in the East, as he did not doubt that the emperor would have granted all if they had pressed it, as they had been commanded. On this point the exact truth may never be known; but whatever the cause, the pope died in prison under the Arian rule.

The popes, from the days of Constantine, had assumed most arrogant airs; and especially from the time of Leo the Great. And John himself was not a whit behind them in his pretensions. Of his forced visit to Constantinople, Bower says:-- 

"The patriarch invited the pope to perform divine service in the great church, together with him. But he would neither accept the invitation, nor even see the patriarch, till he agreed not only to yield him the first place, but to seat him on a kind of throne above himself. It is observable that the pope alleged no other reason why he should be allowed this mark of distinction than because he was bishop of Rome, or of the first city." Ib.

We can but faintly imagine what must have been the feelings of this arrogant bishop, when sent on an embassy to intercede for those whom he declared heretics, and whom he would gladly have seen exterminated. But when he returned to his own see, in the first city, he was as helpless and dependent as the meanest citizen. And this humiliation the popes were obliged to bear as long as the Arian Ostrogoths possessed Italy.

But this was not the only humiliation which the primate, the head of the orthodox faith, had to suffer. The Vandals were in possession of Africa, and they also were Arians. Emulating the spirit of the orthodox or Catholic emperor, they were bitterly persecuting the Trinitarians in their dominions. The pope was compelled to intercede in behalf of the Arians in the East, and to put a stop to the persecutions which were raging against them; but he had no power to check the persecution which those of his own communion were suffering in Africa.

Justin died a. d. 527. Speaking of the persecution in the time of Justin, Gibbon said that Justinian "already meditated the extirpation of heresy, and the conquest of Italy and Africa." His effort to put down heresy in the East was foiled by the king of Italy; and now there remained no way to check its sway, but by the conquest of Africa and Italy. Until this was done, the pope was constantly humiliated. For this purpose the emperor sent Belisarius, an able general, against Africa, in 534. Of the capture of Carthage, the Vandal capital, Gibbon says:-- 

"The defeat of the Vandals, and the freedom of Africa, were announced to the city on the eve of St. Cyprian, when the churches were already adorned and illuminated for the festival of the martyr, whom three centuries of superstition had almost raised to a local deity. 

The Arians, conscious that their reign had expired, resigned the temple to the Catholics, who rescued their saint from profane hands, performed the holy rites, and loudly proclaimed the creed of Athanasius and Justinian. One awful hour reversed the fortunes of the contending parties." Chap. xli, paragraph 9.  The king of the Vandals collected his scattered and feeble forces, and engaged in the final struggle not far from Carthage. Both armies were small, and Gibbon thus speaks of the results of this battle:--

"Yet no more than fifty Romans, and eight hundred Vandals, were found on the field of battle; so inconsiderable was the carnage of a day, which extinguished a nation, and transferred the empire of Africa." Id., paragraph 10

Thus was the second of the ten kingdoms removed to serve the interests of the papacy. 

To be continued…  (tomorrow we'll continue with the third horn that was plucked up by Papal Rome.) 

Prophecy's Jigsaw Puzzle Almost Complete.

 Is history boring? It can be. There is so much of it to delve into. When we are looking for fulfilled prophecy the puzzle could be considered one of those huge jigsaw puzzles. Read this little fact-

"They assembled a 551,232-piece puzzle on September 24, 2011, scoring the record for the most pieces in a finished jigsaw puzzle.Apr 24, 2020"

 Did you note that number?! 551,232 pieces! Imagine putting that jigsaw puzzle together! When it comes to prophecy's puzzle pieces there can be just as many pieces, the possibility exists there are even many more than that. 

Our God gave us the sure word of prophecy- 

2Pe 1:19  We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 

2Pe 1:20  Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 

2Pe 1:21  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. 

A sure word of prophecy.  And the proof that all of mankind today has is so much history to study against prophecy. Piece after piece of prophecy met in our history. Yet so few care at all. I wonder if we were to take some sort of poll how many people could answer, "Yes." When questioned whether or not they know what all of the Statue in Nebuchadnezzar's prophetic dream means. What percentage would even know there was a dream statue? Seriously, where is the desperation for knowledge of Biblical prophecy and its meaning? 

Proof. Do you want proof of the authenticity of God's word? Study prophecy.

I've heard so many twisted beliefs about the Bible, so many. From its being a fable constructed to control people to it being a man-made book that simple men put together- leaving out a lot of other Biblical books, and putting in only what suited them. What's true is, there was a council that did construct what we know today as the New Testament. They did leave out books that are even mentioned in the books they left in. What is also true is, God GUIDED man through the HOLY SPIRIT to put together the word of God that we have today. All we need to know the Gospel of Salvation and the truth of God is in the Bible in what I personally perceive to be the closest translated into English- the KJV.  There are many versions and even the KJV has its flaws in translation. To study it very deeply is to be a scholar of Hebrew and Greek. God has given us all we need to know to be His if we choose to know Him.

I am very far from being a Biblical scholar, and yet, by the grace of God I have been allowed to see the truth of His word. I've read the prophecies, I've read where they've come to pass, and NOTHING can stop the rest of the prophecy from coming to pass, nothing!  This huge jigsaw puzzle has many, many pieces set in their place with a finite number of pieces left until that glorious day of our Savior's return and the ushering in of life as it was meant to be, and will be. 

You can take the 100 piece prophecy puzzle and get a grand overview. You can take the 1000 piece puzzle and get much more detail You can even opt to piece together the 5000 piece puzzle and have an extraordinary detail of prophecy. Or go for the 1,000,000 pieces and get all the facts you can.  These in-depth Bible studies that span weeks and months to complete are the larger puzzle with many, many pieces, many facts and we can choose to study them or ignore them, it's a choice that we alone can make. 

God help us to KNOW HIM FULLY, to KNOW HIM COMPLETELY, to LOVE HIM, to LET HIM LOVE US. May we forever be HIS! All through Jesus Christ our LORD AND SAVIOR, now and forever! Amen!!!!!!!

*******

CHAPTER X. "ANOTHER LITTLE HORN."

In the year 540 b. c., just sixty-three years after the dream of Nebuchadnezzar was given and interpreted, Daniel had a vision, which is recorded in the seventh chapter of his prophecy. In this vision he saw the four winds of Heaven striving upon the great sea, and four great beasts came up from the sea. In verses 17, 18, an explanation of the beasts is given as follows:--

"These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever."

These words show that this vision embraces the same great facts that are presented in the dream of the king, namely, four great kingdoms to be followed by a kingdom that the saints shall possess forever. Then the object of this vision is the same as that of the dream, to acquaint us with the facts of history preceding, and leading to, the setting up of the kingdom of God. 

Verse 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."

The lion is called the king of beasts, and it bears about the same relation to the other beasts that gold bears to the other metals of the image of chapter 2. "Eagle's wings" adds something to the same quality, denoting the rapidity with which the empire rose to its wonderful greatness in the seventh century before Christ. But its wings were plucked, and the lion's heart was taken away. We must bear in mind that this beast, as the head of gold of the image, represented the empire of Babylon, and not any one emperor or king. The glory of  the kingdom declined from the days of Nebuchadnezzar--so transitory is the glory of this world. Under the reign of Belshazzar there was left the qualities of neither the lion nor the eagle.

Verse 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." 

This is a strikingly correct representation of the kingdom of the Medes and the Persians, the same as the breast and arms of the image. In chapter 8, the kings of Media and Persia are represented by a ram (compare Dan. 8:3, 4, 20), having two horns, and one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last. The Medes were the leading power in the war against Babylon; for Cyrus, the real leader of the armies, gave himself entirely to the service of his uncle, "Darius the Median," who took the kingdom when the city of Babylon was overthrown. Of Darius but little need be said, except that he was ruler over a mighty empire that was presented to him by his nephew, for he gave no evidence of capability of subduing such an empire to himself. "The higher came up last." The Persian  branch of the empire flourished under Cyrus, who was really one of the greatest generals that profane history presents to us; not merely because he could lead great armies, and subdue kingdoms, but he was lenient to his captives, considerate of the comfort and welfare of his soldiers and confederates, and just towards all. He went forth to war, not from a love of conquest, or because of indifference for human life, but in defense of the rights of those who were assailed. Added to all this, in his personal habits he was a model of temperance and benevolence. How well the bear represented the united houses of the Medes and Persians--it raised up itself on one side.

In describing the symbol of this kingdom in Daniel 8, the prophet said he saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward. These are the directions in which the Medes and Persians pursued their conquests; and the three ribs in the mouth of the bear doubtless denote the same thing.

Verse 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."

The leopard represents the third great kingdom, the same as the body of brass of the image, or the rough goat in chapter 8,--the kingdom of Grecia. There is a twofold symbol to denote the speed with which Alexander conquered the world, namely, the body of a leopard, with four wings of a fowl. The love of conquest was his ruling passion. Merely to gratify a senseless ambition, he made war without cause or provocation, upon those who would gladly have remained in peace with him. Seneca said: "Alexander, who is justly entitled the plunderer of nations, made his glory consist in carrying desolation into all places, and in rendering himself the terror of mankind." See Rollin, Book 15, sec. 18. It seems a reflection on humanity to give such a man the title of "the Great." To fully appreciate the description given in Daniel 7:7, it is necessary to notice further the symbol of Grecia in Dan 8:5-9. The goat had a notable horn between his eyes, which, the angel said, was the first king, that is, Alexander. "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 kingdom of Alexander had suffered no decline when he died. He was in the full tide of, victory, not having had time to prepare for himself a capital, when he fell, slain not in war, but by his depraved and ungovernable appetite,--broken in his strength. And for it came up four notable horns toward the four winds of heaven. The angel said, "Four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but  in his power." Dan. 8:22. 

Alexander died b. c. 323. His death was sudden and unexpected, he being in the prime of life; and no provision had been made for a successor. There were many aspirants for power, among the chief of whom was Antigonus. Lyman, in his Historical Chart, has given a view of the kingdom after the death of Alexander, in a few forcible words:--

"The empire was divided into thirty-three governments, distributed among as many general officers. Hence arose a series of bloody, desolating wars, and a period of confusion, anarchy, and crime ensued, that is almost without a parallel in the history of the world. After the battle of Ipsus, 301 b. c., in which Antigonus was defeated, the empire was divided into four kingdoms--Thrace and Bythinia under Lysimachus; Syria and the East under Seleucus; Egypt under Ptolemy Soter; and Macedonia under Cassander." 

Two points are worthy of remark in this symbol and its fulfillment: (1) The prophecy takes no note whatever of this period of anarchy and confusion. It was a period of internal dissensions, in which there was neither time nor opportunity to establish kingdoms on anything like a permanent footing. (2) The four kingdoms which arose toward the four winds of heaven are considered but parts of the same Grecian kingdom. They are no doubt regarded a continuation of the same dominion because the four kings named entered into agreement to divide the kingdom among themselves; they reigned by mutual consent, and not in opposition to one another. This is marked in Dan. 7:6, by the simple expression, "The beast had also four heads."

Verse 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."

The likeness of the fourth kingdom, represented by the legs of the image in chapter 2, is readily seen in this beast. The fourth kingdom of iron was to be stronger than those preceding it; so this beast was strong exceedingly, and it had great iron teeth. "As iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things, and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise," was said of the fourth kingdom, represented by the legs of the image; and so of this beast: "It devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it." 

And it had ten horns, which are said in verse 24 to be ten kings that shall arise. These ten kings were represented by the feet and toes of the image,--the ten kingdoms rising out of the Roman empire when it was broken up by its invaders from the north and northeast. Thus far the facts presented in the vision of these four beasts are identical with those of the image in the dream of Nebuchadnezzar.

Chapter 2:43 says of these ten kingdoms, "They shall mingle themselves with the seed of men; but they shall not cleave one to another." This shows that these kingdoms were not smitten by the stone as soon as they arose; there must be a time for the mingling--for efforts at consolidation, for changes to take place-- before the kingdom and dominion shall be given to the saints of the Most High.

This statement in chapter 2:43, in regard to their mingling, and yet not cleaving to one another, contains but a faint hint of all the changes which should take place before the closing scenes. The same idea is presented in verse 34. 

After the image was presented complete, Daniel said: "Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out," etc.; as if he continued to observe the image until the stone appeared. And we shall see that each succeeding vision, whether of Daniel or John, contains some additional events to precede the setting up of the kingdom of God, and the destruction of all the nations and kingdoms of this world. The additional facts in chapter 7 are principally brought to view in-- 

Verse 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."

In all the Scriptures a horn is the symbol of power, without regard to the nature of the power. And there was an extraordinary power rising into notice just at the time when Western Rome was broken into these fragments or kingdoms. 

Verse 24 says, "He shall be diverse from the first." And this was diverse from the others in that it arose as a religious, a professedly Christian, power. Although it arose as a little horn, so that it did not at first take its place among the kingdoms of the earth, it became very strong, for its "look was more stout than its fellows." 

And it is so well known that it passes without proof, that the Romish Church kingdom became stronger than the strongest kingdoms of the earth. The heads of this system, the popes of Rome, claimed it as their right to rule over the kings, and to absolve subjects from their allegiance

to any king who refused submission to their will. On this point Professor Gaussen, of Geneva, gave the following pointed and truthful testimony:--

"Daniel tells us (verse 20) that though this horn was the least, his 'look was more stout than his fellows.' The pomps of Charlemagne, Charles V., Louis XIV., and Bonaparte were very great; but were they comparable to that of the Roman pontiff? The greatest kings must hold his stirrup, serve him at table (what do I say?) must prostrate themselves before him, and kiss his feet; and even put their necks under his proud foot. Go yet this year to view him in the Vatican, as I myself have done. You will see hanging in the royal hall, where all the ambassadors of Europe pass, a picture representing the great emperor, Henry IV., uncovered before Gregory VII. You will see in another picture the heroic and powerful emperor Frederick Barbarossa upon his knees and elbows, before Pope Alexander III., in the public square of Venice; the foot of the pope rests on his shoulder; his scepter cast to the ground; and under the picture, these words: 'Frederick, a suppliant, adores, promising faith and obedience.' You must see with your own eyes this priest-king in his palaces and temples, to form an idea of his pomps, and to understand the full meaning of these words of Daniel: 'His look was more stout than his fellows.' What Eastern king was ever borne like him upon men's shoulders, decked with the plumes of the peacock? Incense is burnt before him as before an idol; they kneel on both knees before him; they kiss the soles of his feet; they worship him." Lecture in Geneva College, 1843. 

Such was his rise, and such is his appearance. "And before whom three [kings] fell." All who are acquainted with the history, religious and secular, of the fourth and fifth centuries, are aware that the Arian controversy was the leading cause of dispute, not only in the churches and councils, but among kings. The Gothic kings were Arians; and in those days the people professed the faith of their kings. But the Church of Rome was the representative of the Trinitarian faith. This faith was indorsed by the Council of Nice, where the primacy was  conferred upon the bishop of Rome. This forever bound the bishop of that see to that faith. The primacy and the doctrine of the Trinity were inseparable. That church was the chief support of what was then called the orthodox faith, while the Goths were held to be heretics. 

The Heruli, under Odoacer, who were also Arians, took possession of Italy. Gibbon says:--

"Odoacer was the first Barbarian who reigned in Italy, over a people who had once asserted their just superiority above the rest of mankind. . . Like the rest of the Barbarians, he had been instructed in the Arian heresy; but he revered the monastic and episcopal characters; and the silence of the Catholics attest the toleration which they enjoyed." Decline and Fall, chap. 36, paragraphs 32, 33. In this respect the conduct of the Barbarian heretics was in strong contrast with that of the orthodox or Catholics, for these never failed to persecute the Arians when they had the power. And the spirit of persecution was so strongly entrenched in them that when they could not persecute those whom they consigned to perdition as heretics, they fell to quarreling among themselves. In them worldly ambition seemed to have entirely supplanted the spirit of Christianity. Of the time of Odoacer, Gibbon, in the same place, further says: 

"The peace of the city required the interposition of his prefect Basilius in the choice of a Roman pontiff." That is to say, that the election of a pope was accompanied with such party strifes that the authority of the Barbarian heretic was necessary to preserve the peace of the city, and to prevent bloodshed; for such an election was sometimes the occasion of fatal quarrels. It was also customary to purchase votes in the selection of the pope, and the Arian king was obliged to use his authority to put an end to this scandal. 

Upon the death of Pope Simplicius, in 483, the people and clergy assembled for the election of a new bishop for Rome. Then occurred that interference of Odoacer of which Gibbon spoke, as quoted above. Bower's History of the Popes says:--

"But while they were assembled for that purpose, in the Church of St. Peter, Basilius the prefectus pretoria, and lieutenant of King Odoacer, entered the assembly; and, addressing the electors, that is, the people, the senate, and the clergy, expressed great surprise at their taking upon them to appoint a successor to the deceased bishop, without him; adding, that it belonged to the civil magistrate to prevent the disturbances that might arise on such occasions, lest from the church they should pass to the State. . . . He then declared all they had done without him to be null; and ordered the election to be begun anew, though it was already near concluded. But, in the first place, he caused a law to be read in the name of Odoacer, forbidding the bishop, who should now be chosen, as well as his successors, to alienate any inheritance, possessions, or sacred utensils, that now belonged, or should for the future belong, to the church; declaring all such bargains void; anathematizing both the seller and the buyer; and obliging the latter, and his heirs, to restore to the church all lands and  tenements thus purchased, how long soever they may have possessed them." 

To be continued… (There are many proofs to enable a sure word of prophecy to be comprehended.)

Immortal Flesh and Blood.

 Flesh and blood will not inherit heaven-  our flesh and blood is corruptible- it can decay. How well do we know that our lives on earth are finite and filled with degradation. You don't notice it right away as you're growing up, instead you hear it from your parents and their moans and groans. As we age our bodies just aren't as they were when we were children. Yes, we can be in tiptop shape but aging factors will happen regardless. You'll lose the ability to read fine print, your hair will gray, your flesh will wrinkle even with the best creams and lotions. Your facial features will alter. No matter how much people exclaim that some actors/actresses seem ageless- it's a lie. Yes, they may be aging gracefully and not look their years but if you take a picture of them as a young teen and them at forty, fifty, sixty… they just are NOT going to look that young. Eventually even the most youthful in appearance will succumb to death, if of nothing other than old age. 

We know how our bodies react to time, we know the frailty of flesh and blood. Our flesh and blood HAS to be altered if we are to inherit a kingdom where there is no death, God's kingdom, the kingdom of heaven this is where we will go when our Lord and Savior returns to take us with him.  Corruptible flesh and blood will never, ever make it to heaven.  We don't know how the change will take place- that is the miracle beyond our comprehension that only our Lord knows, but we know it will take place. 

May we be changed in a moment, in a twinkling of an eye…

1Co 15:52  In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 

1Co 15:53  For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 

All through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior now and forever! 

Amen.

*******

THE THRONE OF DAVID

Jesus says he is set down on his Father's throne, and will grant to the overcomer to sit down with him in his throne. Of this latter throne the angel said to Mary:--

"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end." Luke 1:32, 33.

The throne which he now occupies is the throne of the universe, and it can in no sense be called the throne of David. The difference between his occupancy of the two can be readily seen.

1. He inherits this throne as the son of David. On the throne of his Father in Heaven his genealogy is not reckoned. 

2. David had no priesthood; and Christ will have no priesthood on David's throne. In Heaven only, as the antitype of Melchisedec, is he a priest.

3. He shall sit upon the throne of David forever, and of his kingdom there shall be no end. But he will resign the throne of his Father in Heaven, and of his priestly kingship there will be an end; he will deliver up that kingdom.

Now we may confidently appeal to every reader: To which of these thrones and kingdoms will the promises and prophecies apply, which we have been noticing? Which of these kingdoms will destroy the kingdoms of this world, and fill the whole earth? To which of these thrones will the saints be exalted? Will Jesus destroy his enemies while he sits a priest at his Father's right hand, or after he leaves that position, and takes possession of his own throne? 

He will sometime say to the righteous, Come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; will he say this while he is on the Father's throne, or when he shall come again, in his own kingdom? See Matt. 25:31-41. 

Mat 25:31  When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: 

Mat 25:32  And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: 

Mat 25:33  And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. 

Mat 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: 

Mat 25:35  For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: 

Mat 25:36  Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. 

Mat 25:37  Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? 

Mat 25:38  When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 

Mat 25:39  Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 

Mat 25:40  And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. 

Mat 25:41  Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels

James says: "Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?" James 2:5. This describes the present position of the saints, and their relation to the kingdom. They who are rich in faith, and love God, are heirs of the kingdom, and not yet in possession. 

Indeed, they cannot inherit the kingdom in their present mortal state; for if they did they would leave it to other people at their death. Some may doubt the correctness of this, thinking that it conflicts with the words of Paul in Rom. 8:38, 39; but it does not. Death cannot separate us from the love of Christ, for he is Lord both of the dead and the living. Rom. 14:9. He will redeem us from the grave, which is the land of the enemy; for death is an enemy. Jer. 31:15-17; 1 Cor. 15:26. But surely, when we are in the land of the enemy, under the dominion of death and the grave, we are not in the kingdom of

Christ.

On this point we have the most decisive testimony in the words of Paul in 1 Cor. 15:50: "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." Flesh and blood is an expression denoting a corruptible state, such as we all possess in this world of mortality. In this state we cannot inherit the kingdom of God. And why not?--

Because the kingdom of God is an everlasting kingdom; of the reign of Christ there will be no end. Being an incorruptible kingdom, only incorruptible subjects can inherit it; otherwise they would die and leave it to other people. From this point the apostle goes on to explain how we may inherit that kingdom. "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."

This will take place at the sounding of the last trump, when the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and the living shall be changed. At that time the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven "with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God." 1 Thess. 4:14-17. Then the dead in Christ will arise immortal, and the living will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air, and so be forever with the Lord. 

Of this time the Lord Jesus speaks in Matt. 25:31-34. The Son of man will come in the glory of the Father, and all the holy angels with him. His voice will raise the saints, immortal, incorruptible; and then he will say to them: "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." This is "the first dominion," for it was prepared from the foundation of the world. And that will be the first moment that the saints could inherit it, for until that time they are mortal, corruptible, and cannot inherit the incorruptible kingdom of God. The gospel of the kingdom is still being preached, and concerning it the prayer of faith is still ascending: "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in Heaven."

Here we may emphasize the facts already noticed in regard to the true heirs. For purposes which have been considered, the children of Jacob had especial privileges for a season, and they might have occupied a high place in the fulfillment of the purposes of grace; but, as Jesus said, they would not. Matt. 23:37. For this unfaithfulness, for their oft despising the messengers of God's love and mercy, and finally for maliciously putting to death his only-begotten Son, their house was left desolate, and the kingdom of God was taken from them to be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. Matt. 21:33-43. From the first announcement of the gospel, this truth began to be given to them. John the Baptist said to them:--

"Think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our Father; for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham."Matt. 3:9.

Do any think this was a hard saying? If so, why? He who could make a living soul of the dust of the ground, and can bring the dead from the earth, and would cause the very stones to cry out if necessary to have the words of the prophet fulfilled (Gen. 2:7; Luke 19:38-40), could make living beings of the stones of the valley of the Jordan, and make them children of Abraham through faith in Christ. And Jesus said that the literal descendants of Jacob, who did not believe in him, were not the children of Abraham, but were the children of the devil. John 8:39-44; compare Matt. 13:38, 39; Rev. 3:9.  

The apostle Paul might have gloried because of his descent, yet he considered it all loss for Christ. Phil. 3:5, 7. How many have lost the treasures of the riches of God's grace in his covenant with Abraham, because of their vain boasting of their birth, proud of the accident of being born in a certain line, never accepting the word made plain to everyone, that they must be born again or they could never see the kingdom of God! Paul emphatically says they are not Jews; they are not the children of promise, and their circumcision is not circumcision (Rom. 2:28, 29); they have been broken off, so that they no longer belong to the stock of Israel, and they can only be restored by being grafted in again by faith in Christ. (Rom. 11:23); while the Gentiles by birth, who have accepted Christ, are no longer strangers; they are no more foreigners, but citizens of the commonwealth of Israel. Eph. 2:11-19.

Having traced the promises of the kingdom of David to their fulfillment, and having seen that it will be as extensive as, and identical with, the inheritance promised to Abraham and his seed, we are prepared to notice a query that has seemed to puzzle many minds. Seeing that the Scriptures declare that. Abraham was the heir of the whole world, why was he taken to the hill country of Palestine to be shown his inheritance? He was led from Mesopotamia to near the present site of Jerusalem, and there the Lord said to him, "Unto thy seed will I give this land." Why was not the promise made in the rich valley of the Euphrates? or why was he not taken to the land of Goshen, in Egypt? Let us illustrate our reply by a supposition. The empire of Russia is very large. Suppose that an individual were taken to some far-away corner of this empire, and told that he and his posterity should possess all the land that he could see, it might prove to be an inconsiderable gift. But take him to St. Petersburg, to a position overlooking the city, its palaces, and all the treasures of the empire; then tell him that all that he can see shall belong to him and his children after him, and that would be quite a different thing. So God took Abraham to the spot where the capital of the earth is to be located; where the city which hath foundations, for which Abraham looked, will come down from Heaven. Here Abraham offered Isaac; here the True Seed of promise died to purchase the inheritance of the children of Adam; and here will the triumphant Saviour descend to redeem the purchased possession. Here will David see his Son sit upon his glorious throne. Here will Adam recover his longlost garden, and again delight in approaching unto the tree of life. There was good reason why Abraham was led to this land, to the seat of the future capital of the whole world, to receive the promises. The great wonders of God's power and grace have been here displayed; and here will the full fruition of his gracious purpose be accomplished. Here Christ suffered; here he will triumph; here he will reign forever and ever.

"To the land where the Saviour of sinners once trod, Where he labored, and languished, and bled; Where he triumphed o'er death, and ascended to God, As he captive captivity led." 

History Is Proof.

 Kings and Queens, Royalty, Movie Stars, Athletic Stars, Educational Stars, Business Stars, Political Stars, Inherited Stardom-- Wealth, Power, Prestige. What do most (not all of course) of these people have in common? They are a minority in a world of too numerous to count- poor. The poor outnumber the wealthy by far. Here is an online quote-

'Income and wealth inequalities significant

The report highlights the extent of global income and wealth inequalities. At a global level the average income for an adult is $23,380 (when adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity or PPP).

However, the report's authors explain that this conceals wide disparities between and within countries. The richest 10% of the global population currently take home 52% of the income. The poorest half of the global population? Well they earn just 8%.

On average, an individual from the top 10% will earn $122,100, but an individual from the bottom half will earn just $3,920.

And, when it comes to wealth (valuable assets and items over and above income), the gap is even wider. The poorest half of the global population owns just 2% of the global total, while the richest 10% own 76% of all wealth.'

From <https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/12/global-income-inequality-gap-report-rich-poor/> 

Why am I bringing this up at all? Because the above is all about temporary, earthly wealth. People envision Income Equality, why? Because they want all people to be treated with the same deference the wealthy are. They want equal respect, equal health care, equal opportunity to live a life of envisioned mental, emotional, physical, financial - calmness, peacefulness and derive some happiness from all that is mentioned. This is a world not where any one group of people dominate another. This is a world without any dictators, without any kings, without any presidents… but rather a world where all are on an equal level. I'm talking fairy tale, unbelievable, impossible things aren't I? And yet, this is the desire of that vast majority who are suffering under the hardship of a life that is incredibly far from equal on any level. People say, work hard and… yet not everyone is capable of working hard- this is TRUTH and not through any FAULT of their own. Oh, how I could go on and on, but the point I'm trying to make here is that WE WILL NEVER HAVE WHAT IS TRULY DESIRED- NEVER WILL THAT SORT OF LIFE EXIST HERE ON EARTH WITH LIFE …continuing on as it has for thousands and thousands and thousands of years…  Right now we live in a world that has one man, one government killing people because he(they) want their land, their subjection to them. And this is just the major war that in May 2022 is taking place. There are many other smaller wars that don't affect the first world countries so they just let them go on, ignoring them for the most part as people are killed for the same reason- land ownership, or ideal enforcement, religious enforcement and so on.  

This world has NO answers to its problems, none, or they would have implemented them long before now, right?

The truth is this world is going to be filled with evil, heartache, pain and suffering and remain so until our LORD and SAVIOR returns and takes all of His people to the Heavenly Kingdom.  OUR hope must be in CHRIST and the good news of the Kingdom of God, salvation, redemption, forgiveness! If we keep our hope in this current world, it's placing our hope in a lost cause. 

Christ will come again. Prophetic History has PROVEN this beyond a doubt! 

Doubt if you choose, you're not forced to believe- love doesn't force.

All in the name of our Lord and Savior, now and forever, Jesus Christ!!!!!!! Amen!

 

*******

TWO THRONES AND TWO KINGDOMS

Listen to what the Lord Jesus says: "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne." Rev. 3:21. Of the present position of the Saviour, read again: "We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens." "Is set down at the right hand of the throne of God." Heb. 8:1; 12:2, and others.

While he is on the throne of his Father in Heaven he is a priest; a priest-king, after the order of Melchisedec. But note this important point: in his priesthood he has no genealogy. See the argument in Hebrews, chapter five to seven. He is a priest after the order of Melchisedec, whose genealogy is not recorded. But the priesthood will have an end. He will leave that position on the throne of his Father. When he comes to take vengeance on his foes, he will no longer plead the power of his blood in their behalf. When the great day of his wrath is come he will no longer be an advocate. His Father called him to sit at his right hand until his enemies are put under his feet. Ps. 110:1. And so the apostle writes: "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool." Heb. 10:12, 13.

With these scriptures before us it is easy to correct an error into which many have fallen, namely, that one great object, if not the great object, of the reign of Christ, is to subdue his enemies, or put them under his own feet. 

That is a work that Christ will never do. 1 Cor. 15:23-28, is often quoted to uphold that view, whereas it teaches the very opposite of that. It reads thus:-- "Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that did put all things under him, that God may be all in all." 

This scripture clearly shows that Christ possesses a kingdom which he will sometime resign. The time is located at or near his coming. Then he will have delivered up the kingdom; he will have left the throne of the Majesty in the Heavens, where he is now sitting as a kingly priest. Verse 28 says: "And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." The Son does not subdue all things unto himself; he does not put all things under his own feet. If he did, how could he become subject to him that put all things under him? The Father said: "I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession." "Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." And 1 Cor. 15:27 says: "But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things under him." Wrong ideas on this text are easily imbibed from overlooking the manner in which the pronouns are applied. "For he [the Son] must reign until he [the Father] hath put all things under his [the Son's] feet." This is not arbitrary; it is necessary. See again: "And when all things shall be subdued unto him [the Son] then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him [the Father] that did put all things under him [the Son], that God may be all in all." Notice the several events here brought to view:--

1 The coming of Christ.

2. Then comes the end.

3. Then he shall have delivered up the kingdom to the Father.

4. He must reign until all things are put under his feet by the Father.

5. When all things are put under him, he himself becomes subject to the Father,--he resigns that throne, and delivers up that kingdom.

6. The Father then becomes all in all; sole occupant of that throne in the Heavens.

This is the kingdom--that is the throne which he will deliver up at the end of his priestly work. Then probation will have ended; then the saints will have been sealed unto full redemption; and they that are unjust must remain unjust still. Rev. 22:11, 12. Then will the Son break his enemies with a rod of iron, and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

Then the day of the wrath of the Lamb will have come, the image will be  smitten on the feet, and all the dominions of the earth be destroyed. What has here been stated concerning the throne of the Father in Heaven is well known, and will be readily admitted by all. Let us briefly examine some of the facts of Scripture concerning the throne of David.

To be continued…