Daniel Vision vs Constantine the Great

[mms20102]

Across my Biblical studies in the old testament there is a chapter named Daniel and this chapter has some visions that's supposed to represent the future events to come and in most of the time those visions are represented in real Historic facts, in this post I would like to discuss the vision of Daniel 7 https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Daniel-Chapter-7/
So I will make 4 main points in this post:

1- The 4 beasts
2- The 10 horns
3- The small horn
4- The time after the small horn

First point is the 4 beasts no one will had different interpretation of the beasts other than the 4 empires, 1- Babylon 2- Persian 3- Greek 4- Roman

Second point is the 10 horns.

23-Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

24-And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

The Hakham Saadia Gaon said in his Book
The ten could be :
1- The greatest emperors.
2- The greatest fathers ( The earliest Emperors )
3- The greatest one of each family.
If we take any of the above conditions only 10 emperors will remain.

In my opinion they are the 10 emperors that conquered Jerusalem and killed both monotheists and Trinitarians and they are ten starting from Nero up to Diocletian 305 not just my humble opinion but also the opinion of many Christian theologians.

Now the small Horn

24 - and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

The small horn here should be also an emperor from the Romans and after 10 emperors and he shall conquer three and say great things against God and will be different from those 10 and the one matching the vision is Constantine the Great.
Constantine the Great in 313 made the Edict of Milan which declared tolerance for Christianity in the Roman Empire, he began to favor Christianity beginning in 312, finally becoming a Christian and being baptised by either Eusebius of Nicomedia an Arian bishop or Pope Saint Sylvester which is maintained by the Catholic Church and the Coptic Orthodox Church. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_the_Great).
he eliminated 3 emperors

In his book History of Christian Church, Philip Schaff mentioned

With his every victory, over his pagan rivals, Galerius, Maxentius, and Licinius, his personal leaning to Christianity and his confidence in the magic power of the sign of the cross increased; yet he did not formally renounce heathenism, and did not receive baptism until, in 337, he was laid upon the bed of his death

(https://worthychristianbooks.com/histor ... an-empire/)

The very brightest period of his reign is stained with gross crimes, which even the spirit of the age and the policy of an absolute monarch cannot excuse. After having reached, upon the bloody path of war, the goal of his ambition, the sole possession of the empire, yea, in the very year in which he summoned the great council of Nicaea, he ordered the execution of his conquered rival and brother-in-law, Licinius, in breach of a solemn promise of mercy (324). Not satisfied with this, he caused soon afterwards, from political suspicion, the death of the young Licinius, his nephew, a boy of hardly eleven years. But the worst of all is the murder of his eldest son, Crispus, in 326

Also in their book (The Complete Book of When and Where) E. Michael Rusten · Sharon O. Rusten wrote

But there was a darker side to Constantine. In 326, he had his wife, the sister of Maxentius, and one son executed under suspicious circumstances. He also never relinquished his position as chief priest of the pagan state religion, and his coins proclaimed his allegiance to the sun god. He delayed Christian baptism until shortly before his death.

https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/m ... nstantine/

His conversion was not accompanied by a sharp break with his former paganism. Rather, a transition is discernible from the worship of the divine Sun to the service of the one true Christian God. When, in 321, he made the first day of the week a holiday, he described it as the day of the sun (but so do Christians today!).

https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/m ... rly-church

What Constantine did about Christmas further suggests he had Christianity in mind. Early Christians, of course, had no information that would help the, calculate the date of Christ's birth. The earliest evidence for the observance of December 25 as the birthday of Christ appears in the Philocalian Calendar, composed at Rome in 336. For many years this date was observed only in the west ; the eastern churchs observed Jan 6, Epiphany. Curiously, pagan holidays lay behind both of these dates. December 25 was the Natalis Soli Invicti, the birthday of the Unconquered Sun. Jan 6 was the feast of Dionysus.

so regarding the quotations above we can say for sure the small horn is Constantine the Great

Now before going to 4th point we need to highlight some points
1- His converting to Christianity was political issue
2- He eliminated monotheists and declared trinitarians
3- He was never baptized until his death
4- He killed many of his family members
5- He mixed Christianity and paganism
6- He killed anyone owned Arian books


Now we move to point 4, the point that Christians ,Muslims and other theologians have interpreted differently

He will speak words against the Most High [God] and wear down the saints of the Most High, and he will intend to change the times and the law; and they will be given into his hand for a time, [two] times, and half a time [three and one-half years].

https://biblehub.com/daniel/7-25.htm

we need to ask first who ended the Ruling of Constantine and his followers, and the answer is clear, Muslims ended the ruling of Constantine and his followers over Jerusalem ( Kingdom of God). Constantine and his followers reigned over Jerusalem from 305 up 636 means 331 years which is by lunar years 640 and which is almost 3.5 portions of time ( 1 portion = 100 years )

This post was nothing but a personal view to the vision.

Edit Important note: -
Main researcher ( Ahmed Spea )
The post is a modified English version of the main research.

[GoldenCup]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #128]

1. A crowned SEA BEAST emerges from the sea. There is no way to know when this sea beast receieved its crowns but we can reasonably assume it was upon its creation by the Dragon.

No we can't reasonably assume that, as the imagery in Rev 12 proves. The Woman in rev. 12 gives birth to the male Child Jesus Christ, whom the dragon tries to kill when he's born (through King Herod The Great). Then we're told that the child was caught up to God and to his throne which symbolizes the ascension of Jesus 33 years later. So although the imagery is showing us something that appears to be just short moments in time, it actually covers long periods of time.

From this we can reasonably draw the conclusion that we're looking at the sea beast in a later stage which is proven by its 10 horns being crowned in Rev. 13. So no, we can't assume this happened upon its creation by the Dragon, but we can assume that we're being shown the imagery of the scarlet sea beast in its later stage.

2. Another beast , an EARTH BEAST emerges from the earth.
3. The EARTH BEAST makes a similar, but not identical third beast ¤ , an IMAGE of the sea beast

I agree on points#2 & 3. What I don't agree with, and what the explicit text in Rev. 13 refutes, is you're erroneous identification of the scarlet beast of Rev.17, with the IMAGE beast that the Earth beast creates. This is refuted by the explicit statement in Rev. 13, which proves the SEA BEAST has the 10 horns crowned. Before you're tempted to respond to this point, please read my other objections to your points# 4 & 5 which tie into this.

4. The HARLOT is first seen [ * ] riding a beast. We can reasonably assume the beast to be the IMAGE BEAST. It (The image beast) has seven heads, ten horns but no crowns

Not when we consider Rev. 13 which specifically states that the 10 horns are crowned on the Sea Beast. The crowning of 10 horns doesn't happen twice, which would mean the Harlot appears twice, and would have to be destroyed twice. The destruction of Babylon the Great happens ONCE NOT TWICE, just as the crowning of the 10 horns happens ONCE NOT TWICE. So no, we can't "reasonably assume" that the harlot sat on an IMAGE beast, but on the SCARLET SEA BEAST.

So based on the explicit text that the 10 Horns are crowned on the SEA BEAST (not based on erroneous assumptions), we can reasonably conclude that the Scarlet beast of Rev. 17, IS THE SAME as the SEA BEAST in Rev.13. Then from this we can reasonably conclude that the scene in Rev. 17, when the harlot rides the scarlet sea beast for the first time, happens PRIOR to the scarlet sea beast horns being crowned. And that's why there's no mention of horns on the scarlet sea beast in Rev.17. You see how we drew the 3 supported & reasonable conclusions based on the EXPLICIT statement from Rev. 13?

5. At a certain point during this ride, the "ten kings" on the on the image beast' s head, give their power to the (uncrowned) IMAGE BEAST for a short time[/

You have it backwards. Rev. 13 proves the crowning of the horns happens on the SEA BEAST, which symbolizes the 10 Kings receiving AUTHORITY AS KINGS with the beast for a short time. You can't refute that. Your position requires for the 10 Kings to be crowned TWICE, once on the sea beast, and once on your supposed "image beast", which the bible doesn't support. This would mean the Harlot gets destroyed TWICE. This is foolish. We can most reasonably conclude that the scarlet and sea beast are one and the same.

You do realize you're position on this is full of contradictions, erroneous assumptions, and unsupportable conclusions?

[JehovahsWitness]

From this we can reasonably draw the conclusion that we're looking at the sea beast in a later stage ...

If by " we're looking at the sea beast in a later stage " you mean : the vision of John depicts THE SEA BEAST coming out of the sea after the first century, then I agree. There's nothing I said to imply otherwise. Irrespective of when THE SEA BEAST came into existence , we see it emerge from the sea wearing its crowns and it is never depicted without them.

I don't agree with, and what the explicit text in Rev. 13 refutes...

I've read all your posts and there is nothing (i.e. no statement) in Revelation 13 which makes it impossible for the IMAGE BEAST to be the SCARLET BEAST.

[JehovahsWitness]

5. At a certain point during this ride, the "ten kings" on the image beast' s head, give their power to the (uncrowned) IMAGE BEAST for a short time

You have it backwards. Rev. 13 proves the crowning of the horns happens on the SEA BEAST ...

If by "the crowning of the horns" you mean to say, THE SEA BEAST has crowns on its horns, I agree.

Even if we understand it to mean "GIVEN AUTHORITY AS KINGS" and NOT "CROWNED."

Are you going to deny ... the imagery of the Ten Horns having crowns on the Sea beast

No. We know the SEA BEAST that John sees come out if the sea , does so with crowns on its horns. Crowns are a symbol of souvereignty (rulership) so we can infer that the SEA BEAST has a degree authority over something.

TEN HORNS DIFFERENT KINGS

Are you going to deny that ... the 10 Kings have been "given authority as Kings" with the Sea Beast?

There is no mention of the "ten kings " in Chapter 13, only the ten horns. And as far as authority is concerned, the scripture explains "And the dragon gave to the beast its power and its throne and great authority" so for the sea beast its authority isnt received by the horns specifically but by the beast itself.

Are you going to deny that ... The same 10 Kings who AFTER they've received authority as Kings WITH the Beast, then destroy the Harlot?

Not at all. The10 kings in Rev 17 that receive power are definitely the same ones that kill the harlot. And they are definitely on the head of the beast. The only question us, what is the identity of that beast. Is it the SEA BEAST or , the IMAGE BEAST. WHICH kings do the horns on the SEA BEAST represents and WHICH kings do the horns on the IMAGE BEAST represent.


I feel confident you will not attempt to beg the question

[JehovahsWitness]

4. The HARLOT is first seen [ * ] riding a beast. We can reasonably assume the beast to be the IMAGE BEAST. It (The image beast) has seven heads, ten horns but no crowns

Not when we consider Rev. 13 which specifically states that the 10 horns are crowned on the Sea Beast.

What* makes it impossible for the IMAGE of the sea beast to be created without crowns ? ie for the IMAGE not to be an exact replica of the original)

*without being circular (please dont say " it had to be an exact replica because... it had to be an exact replica")

[JehovahsWitness]

...Your position requires for the 10 Kings to be crowned TWICE, once on the sea beast, and once on [the] "image beast"...

Not if they are different kings and not if the ten horns on the IMAGE BEAST can act without crowns? Obviously crowns are not necessary to have a level of authority , look at the EARTH BEAST , it has authority comparable to the sea beast and yet it has no crowns (see Rev 13:12)

REVELATION 13:11, 12

11 Then I saw another wild beast ascending out of the earth, and it had two horns like a lamb, but it began speaking like a dragon.+ 12 It [the EARTH BEAST] exercises all the authority of the first wild beast in its sight. ...

A crown is only an eternal symbol of souvereignty, it does not give confer power any more than a wedding ring makes you married or a positive pregnancy test makes you pregnant. All these things are simply external indicators of an unseen reality or condition. The ten kings of the SCARLET beast don't need crowns to attack and kill the Harlot, they just need the authority.

REVELATION 17:12

The ten horns that you saw mean ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they do receive --> authority <--- as kings for one hour with the wild beast.

THE IMAGE BEAST is an instrument of the SEA BEAST. As it's IMAGE it naturally has the same horns as the original (which represents the same thing as the original). They dont need to be made kings twice (any more than a pregnant woman has to ask her husband to impregnate her reflection in a mirror twice). Once the horns on the IMAGE BEAST are given authority to act as kings they do so , no crowning required.

Is the only possible way for the HARLOT to be killed by kings , that she is be killed by the sea beast before it got its crowns. No , whether killed by the IMAGE BEAST or THE SES BEAST, it is the authority not crowns are the determining factor.


JW

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

[GoldenCup]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #135]

Your arguments have now degraded into nothing but extremely erroneous conjecture, and red herring fallacies. You're now oficially grasping at straws.

[JehovahsWitness]

So I take it you have no scripture based rebuttal to the points raised; all of which are factually true and scripturally valid.

• The sea beast most probably existed as an entity well before Jesus was born a human on earth and whichever of its heads had prominence at the time - ROME - would have played a role in the attempt to eliminate the baby Jesus.

• Nothing in the text renders it impossible for the IMAGE BEAST to not be an identical copy if the sea beast. --> post #134

• Sharing certain characteristic does not IMPOSE we a dealing with the same individual or entity (both the DEVIL and the SEA BEAST have the same number if heads and horns but both represent different thngs ) For more on this see the post : Why do the descriptions of the BEASTS in Rev 13 and Rev 17 share certain characteristics?
  viewtopic.php?p=1151702#p1151702

• There is no mention of the "ten kings" in Revelation chapter 13 only ten (crowned ) horns.

• The "ten crowned horns of the SEA beast" can represent kings without representing the SAME kings on its image --> post #133

• The scarlet beast would not need to be crowned (once or even TWICE) for its (10) kings to give it authority to kill the harlot, since authority can exist on royal commission without a crown --> post #135

• The scarlet beast can well destroy the HARLOT a single time if it is given sufficient authority to do so.

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

FURTHER READING : The Book of Revelation​—What Does It Mean?
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/q ... evelation/