Vidqun - very interesting.
EdenOne - even though I disagreed with you I appreciate you stimulating some new thought on this passage.
ive just published on my website a commentary on daniel chapters 2, 3 and 4, concerning nebuchadnezzars dreams of the statue and the great tree.
its titled: the most high rules over the kingdoms of the world and gives them to anyone he chooses.
(click the title for link).
Vidqun - very interesting.
EdenOne - even though I disagreed with you I appreciate you stimulating some new thought on this passage.
ive just published on my website a commentary on daniel chapters 2, 3 and 4, concerning nebuchadnezzars dreams of the statue and the great tree.
its titled: the most high rules over the kingdoms of the world and gives them to anyone he chooses.
(click the title for link).
Vidqun
Your comments about the absolute autocratic monarchy make me think of something else.
In the modern day democracy is promoted as the pinnacle of human government, whereas rule by the people is arguably the ultimate outworking of opposition to theocracy.
So from a theocratic point of view things would deteriorate through these successions of kingdoms whereby the original lie promoted by Satan (I'm talking about a Biblical perspective here, not whether a person believes it or not), that self-rule was better than God-rule, would be held up as the ideal. But in reality it is fragile like iron and clay.
FG
ive just published on my website a commentary on daniel chapters 2, 3 and 4, concerning nebuchadnezzars dreams of the statue and the great tree.
its titled: the most high rules over the kingdoms of the world and gives them to anyone he chooses.
(click the title for link).
Hi EdenOne
I take your points, but in reality the prophecy wasn't really given to the heathen first. Nebuchadnezzar had a dream, but he couldn't even remember what it was. Both the content of the dream and its meaning were both revealed to God's servant.
As well as being a message of hope of the messianic kingdom to God's people, it is also a message of warning to all human governments that their lifespan is limited. To this extent is it fitting that the warning was given to the heathen king, just as the writing on the wall was given to Belshaazar.
To be concerned about the fact that Daniel says the head of gold himself is Nebuchadnezzar is a bit of a sidepoint IMO. The king and the kingdom are pretty interchangeable in this context. Again the writing on the wall in chapter 5 was pronounced against an individual, but the fulfillment of the prophecy was against a nation nonetheless.
FG
ive just published on my website a commentary on daniel chapters 2, 3 and 4, concerning nebuchadnezzars dreams of the statue and the great tree.
its titled: the most high rules over the kingdoms of the world and gives them to anyone he chooses.
(click the title for link).
An intriguing suggestion. The primary problem I have with it is whether that rendering of “elam” (or “olam”) can be sustained given the wider context.
This portion of Daniel is Aramaic rather than Hebrew. The only other place that I can see in which “elam” is applied to a kingdom is Dan 7:14,18,27. And this is most certainly referring to the messianic kingdom.
It is tempting to read Daniel 2-4 as a connected sequence of events as you have suggested, but I favor viewing the book overall as a double-chaism as proposed by William H Shea in 1986, although something similar was presented at least 60 years earlier by E.W. Bullinger for the Aramaic section (see “The Companion Bible”).
If this structure is valid then it makes sense that chapters 2 and 7 would both have messianic kingdom prophecies as their themes. Whereas chapters 4 and 5 would rightly be prophecies restricted to the kings of the time (Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar respectively). Chapters 3 and 6 then are focused on rightful worship, and the trials of God's people.
Add to that the phrase “all these kingdoms” in Dan 2:44. I am aware here that the words could be passed as “kingships” rather than “kingdoms”, but I cannot find a single Bible translation that has gone this route. (http://biblehub.com/daniel/2-44.htm)
As far as the material of the stone being lowlier than the gold, I don't think there is a problem. Evidently the gold, silver etc is from a human standpoint - not God's. Jesus was a lowly one - the stone that the builders rejected. It is only when his kingdom becomes a great mountain having fully crushed the image that everyone understands its superior value.
Similarly the fact that Medo-Persia, Greece etc, might have had more extensive dominions than Babylon is not necessarily important to the image as a whole. From Nebuchadnezzer's standpoint, his form of human government is pure gold. But the whole concept of human government is something that would be shown to have less and less value as the centuries advanced, until finally they are replaced by God's kingdom.
So whilst your idea is interesting and well presented, I still think that the messianic kingdom is the ultimate theme of chapter 2.
FG
as a kid a remember tales of the unexpected being frowned on as it had ouija boards in the opening credits.. .
do you recall any other shows being banned?.
uun .
You've reminded me what a great program that was. Roald Dahl was a fine writer. I always preferrred the written stories to the show, but then I always preferred books to TV or movies anyway.
The content would have been too dark for my parents at the time. Our boundaries were pretty strict. They'd probably be okay with it now though.
this is funny i mean really.
the article is stating what jehovahs witnesses believe... not what the paper thinks of them.. my wife found this one... this is her first catch that she found herself and she is tickled pink lol.
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/wp20130701/religion-and-morals/.
soconfused,
Do you have a link to the original article, or a scan of the hard copy? It would be truly useful.
(I had a look on http://www.deseretnews.com/ but could not find it.)
Thanks,
FG
our congregation is rationing regular bibles like they're gold bars.
i was told that bethel is out of stock!
anyone else hear about this?
Latest rumors:
1) Supplier problem with paper quality in Japan (for 6 months and counting??)
or ...
2) There will be a new release at the annual meeting in October
Anyone heard any others?
does the universe have a collective consciousness?.
at the sub nuclear level of reality...we are all one.
at the core basis of the universe is a single universal field of intelligence.
Just picking up on Terry's point from pg 1:
I use the word UNIVERSE to mean absolutely EVERYTHING which "exists". Others do NOT.
In religious discussions, for example, people tell me that God is...OUTSIDE...of the Universe.
This, of course, has absolutely no meaning for me. Wouldn't "everything" also INCLUDE God???
Fair enough, but in that case surely it is necessary to have another word to describe that portion of the universe to which we have potential access in an observable sense. If dimensions exist that would remain outside of our scope of knowledge no matter how much scientific progress we made, would that still constitute part of our universe? If so then don't we need another word to encapsulate everything that we could ever be consciously aware of?
Or if the multiverse truly exists would you object to talking about "other universes" on the basis that the singular term universe must by definition already encompass them? If so then we would surely need another term to describe that part to which we ourselves have any reference.
Just a thought.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1ukz5m-yo4&feature=youtu.be.
.
cedars.
I was worried about who was going to look after my cats during this year's DC.
I'm so relieved that the GB say we don't need to worry about that, we can just let them die.
It's a true blessing.
the wts uses john 3:13 to prove that before jesus no one was taken to heaven.. in the nwt, john 3:13 reads:"moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but he that descended from heaven, the son of man.".
notice a difference to the king james bible:.
john 3:13 - "and no man has ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the son of man who is in heaven.
flamegrilled
You should be aware that the translators of the King James version took the liberty to add the "worms", supposedly to add clarity to the text; However it doesn't exist in the original hebrew text.
Eden
Yes, I did know that. I was only really including it as an addendum to what I'd already written.
It still reads that way in NWT and others to me, as per my "phrase by phrase" comments (which maybe you didn't notice)