Book of Daniel and Revelation

[Ro_A]

It sounds like it is lead by SDAs trying to sway non-denoms and apparently Catholics too if they can get them.

“Unto 2300 days and then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.”

This will no doubt come up at some point since it forms the key basis of what they teach. They call it their sanctuary doctrine wherein they teach that in 1844 Christ moved from the Holy to the Most Holy place in heaven and at that point sat down at the right hand of God. It backs into their Investigative Judgement etc.

Completely ignoring the many and diverse misunderstandings, heterodox, and heretical aspects of their current interpretation realize that they originally taught that Oct 22, 1844 was the day Christ would come back to earth (after 1843 didn’t work out). When pressed they will say it wasn’t them that taught this it was William Miller. He spawned a number of heretical groups. But yet the entire crowd that formed the SDA movement did believe this date setting. Its called the great disappointment and they believe it is mentioned in Revelation. They believed at that time that they were chosen of God and the world that, correctly, rejected this heretical teaching of date setting had itself rejected God.

After this date, and as a unique group of SDAs, they decided to admit they were wrong that Christ did not come but moved around in heaven from one compartment to another. But they still believed then and still believe now, that those who followed the teaching of date setting by Miller were the ones really following God and the rest of Christendom that opposed date setting was rejecting God. So they say they were wrong but only about the doctrine not about the idea of date setting.

In fact their alleged prophetess saw in vision that it was Gods will for date setting to be taught. That time was never before or after to be a test. But it was God’s will that they should be tested and follow this date setting. She even saw in alleged vision that those who offered prayer to God but didn’t know Christ had moved to the Most Holy from the Holy would have their prayers answered by Satan himself.

Bring this up and they’ll deny it, twist and rephrase all day. And those you speak with probably will be honestly telling you their ideas being legitimately ignorant themselves on this.

There really is no need to move beyond this issue with SDAs but if you do move past there are legion of other issues.

Thanks, this will be very helpful. Although, the book of Daniel was actually picked by my non-denominational friend. My other Catholic friend and i are also watching for some subtle attacks coming from him. He is an ex-Catholic who found the real “truth” and now sincerely trying to save our souls.

 

[luciasclay]

Thanks, this will be very helpful.

Of course the more I get closer to Catholic teaching the more I wonder why it matters to refute their particular form of abberation.

Shouldn’t we bring them to the Church not worry about which branch of schism or heresey they are in.

 

[Ro_A]

Of course the more I get closer to Catholic teaching the more I wonder why it matters to refute their particular form of abberation.

Shouldn’t we bring them to the Church not worry about which branch of schism or heresey they are in.

Don’t get me wrong. My non-Catholic friends are really good Christians. My intention is to explain to them what the Catholic belief is. And that as Catholics we believe in both Holy Scripture and Holy Traditions.

Many times they (SDAs and non-denominationals) have mentioned that if it is not in the Bible they won’t believe it because the bible can interpret itself. But there are also a lot of times that they would have different interepretation (i think more as an opinion) on the same passages. I usually standback and let them discuss hoping that they will eventually realize that their mantra of the “bible can interpret itself” does not hold water.

 

[ryanoneil]

What about the four beasts and the four nations? I think they are trying to imply that the 4th nation is the Roman empire.

It is the Roman empire! Daniel has been fulfilled for nearly 2,000 years. They will probably try and place the second half of the vision in the future. (Putting a 2,000 year gap between the appearance of the fourth beast and the mention of it’s ten horns.

Daniel specifically informs us that only four kingdoms are involved (Dan 7:17). The text doesn’t support the fourth kingdom being “reconstituted” after 2,000 years and still being the same kingdom.

 

[luciasclay]

What about the four beasts and the four nations? I think they are trying to imply that the 4th nation is the Roman empire.

It probably won’t just be implied it will probably be stated clearly.

 

[Ro_A]

It probably won’t just be implied it will probably be stated clearly.

Would they be referring to the Roman empire as the one before or after it accepted Christianity?

 

[ryanoneil]

Would they be referring to the Roman empire as the one before or after it accepted Christianity?

I don’t know what they would say, but I bet they will argue that Christ has not established His Kingdom yet. The Church is an important part of Christ’s Kingdom, established after his death and resurrection

The beast vision is a recapitualation of the statue vision. This was all fulfilled after Christ ascended to heaven.

While you looked at the statue, a stone which was hewn from a mountain without a hand being put to it, struck its iron and tile feet, breaking them in pieces. The iron, tile, bronze, silver, and gold all crumbled at once, fine as the chaff on the threshing floor in summer, and the wind blew them away without leaving a trace. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. (Dan 2:34-35)

As the visions during the night continued, I saw One like a son of man coming, on the clouds of heaven; When he reached the Ancient One and was presented before him, He received dominion, glory, and kingship; nations and peoples of every language serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not be taken away, his kingship shall not be destroyed. (Dan 7:13-14)

 

[garysibio]

For those interested in this topic EWTN will be rerunning a 5-part series called “Will you be left behind?” this week. To see their schedule ewtn.com/tv/NAAdv0309.asp

This is an excellent program about Catholic teaching regarding the return of Jesus. (I saw it when it was aired once before.)

Gary

 

[garysibio]

It’s difficult to pin down SDA theology because it varies from person to person. I was told by one member that, prior to the Incarnation, Jesus and Michael the Archangel were one and the same. (Jehovah’s Witnesses also believe that.) Another SDA had never heard of that and thought I was pulling his leg. Some also believe you must be a vegetarian while others don’t care one way or the other. So, anything you may find out about them may or may not apply to the people you are dealing with.

Gary

 

[garysibio]

Of course the more I get closer to Catholic teaching the more I wonder why it matters to refute their particular form of abberation.

Shouldn’t we bring them to the Church not worry about which branch of schism or heresey they are in.

I find it useful in that, once you know their perspective, it helps you get an idea about what kind of questions you are going to get from them.

Gary

 

[garysibio]

Don’t get me wrong. My non-Catholic friends are really good Christians. My intention is to explain to them what the Catholic belief is. And that as Catholics we believe in both Holy Scripture and Holy Traditions.

Many times they (SDAs and non-denominationals) have mentioned that if it is not in the Bible they won’t believe it because the bible can interpret itself. But there are also a lot of times that they would have different interepretation (i think more as an opinion) on the same passages. I usually standback and let them discuss hoping that they will eventually realize that their mantra of the “bible can interpret itself” does not hold water.

It just occurred to me that having the two differing groups there with you might be helpful. When they begin to disagree on a point you can say, “Gee. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were some way we could know the answer for sure? Oh wait! We can!”

Gary

 

[juliamajor]

A note of interest-Book of Daniel is NOT considered Neviim(Prophets) but part of the Kethuvim(the Writings) in Hebrew scripture.it is not considered that serious a book and parts are considered a polemic against idolatry.One part of Daniel are stories probably related to an Ancient Near East Folk hero named Dan’el. second part is the apocalyptic writings.How it got into the Christian Bible as prophecy- I really don’t know- probably because of it’s similarity to Revelation.As to the composite statue& four beasts as daniel says are Four Kingdoms. To many it’s very clear that the Empires are those of the Babylonians, the Medes, Persians and the Greek empire. Old persian empire speaks of three kingdoms: assyrians, Medes and persians. after Alexander the Great, Greek histories added a fourth Empire to the traditional three- The greek empire…the ten horns are those who vied for control of the empire that Alexander left. Chapter2:41-45refers to the infighting" they will be mingled but will not hold together" probably relates to a marriage that took place of Antiochus II to Bereneice to solidify the empire and bring peace- but instead it brought war. Daniel is very much about the politics of daniel’s time and not so much the endtimes.

 

[Ro_A]

It just occurred to me that having the two differing groups there with you might be helpful. When they begin to disagree on a point you can say, “Gee. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were some way we could know the answer for sure? Oh wait! We can!”

Gary

Yup.

 

[Ro_A]

Our study went well last Tuesday. As i have predicted, they use the 1st verse as the reason why they (SDAs) are vegetarians, most specially when Daniel said that they won’t eat the “food and drink” of the king but instead will only eat vegetables and water for 10 days, ignoring the fact that Daniel and the other 3 men are from the land of Judah and were fearful that the king’s “food and drink” are not undefiled.

 

[garysibio]

Our study went well last Tuesday. As i have predicted, they use the 1st verse as the reason why they (SDAs) are vegetarians, most specially when Daniel said that they won’t eat the “food and drink” of the king but instead will only eat vegetables and water for 10 days, ignoring the fact that Daniel and the other 3 men are from the land of Judah and were fearful that the king’s “food and drink” are not undefiled.

Ask them what they think about Jesus cooking up a fish breakfast for the apostles after His resurrection (John 21:9).

Gary

 

[Ro_A]

Ask them what they think about Jesus cooking up a fish breakfast for the apostles after His resurrection (John 21:9).

Gary

What i asked them was about the fish and the 5 loaves miracle. They did however admit that not all SDAs are vegetarians. some just avoid pork and seafoods.

 

[Ro_A]

Actually, our non-denominational friend revealed to us (Catholics) the reason why we are studying the book of Daniel is because he wants to confront the SDAs about their belief more than our belief - specifically on Chap 12. It turns out that the SDAs believe that Michael the archangel and Jesus are the same. However, they said that they also believe that Jesus is not a created being and that He is God. This is going to be interesting.

 

[YipYupYep]

It turns out that the SDAs believe that Michael the archangel and Jesus are the same.

I have heard that same assertion for them. That’s a pretty far out leap from the Bible to that.

The SDA are a bunch of pretty good people, however, they are misled.

 

[Ro_A]

The SDA are a bunch of pretty good people, however, they are misled.

So true, especially these people. They are gentle, meek and humble. A really good example of how a true Christian should live their lives.

 

[luciasclay]

Ask them what they think about Jesus cooking up a fish breakfast for the apostles after His resurrection (John 21:9).

Gary

Thats a good question and so is the 5000. So is the fact that post flood we are commanded by God to eat meat.

They spin out from under by declaring that meat is much more diseased these days then it was in Christ time. They spin out from the command in Genesis to eat meat by ignoring it and showing life spans immediately dropped after that period thus the addition to meat was unhealthy. To which I respond if God commanded us to eat meat knowing, as you say, it would shorten our lives he must have had a good reason, you are not suggesting we not do what God told us are you ?

Ellen White, their alleged prophetess even said ministers could not expect to get to heaven unless they quit eating meat.

As to the Michael question, that is a vestige of their changing doctrine. Originally they were not trinitarian but later came to embrace it. But they never redid the Michael thing. They will vigorously deny they were originally not trinitarian of course.

And back to the meat thing if you say that SDAs say you cannot eat meat, and thus are condemned by Paul warning of those who say to abstain from it they will then declare they do not teach that at all. Until that topic has passed then they’ll go right back to teaching you should become one.

I’m getting off the topic at hand though.