the four beasts

chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
I have found something that might fit this

Daniel 11:6King James Version (KJV)

6 And in the end of years they shall join themselves together; for the king's daughter of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement: but she shall not retain the power of the arm; neither shall he stand, nor his arm: but she shall be given up, and they that brought her, and he that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these times.

Leo IV the Khazar

Khazars

what do you think?
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
daniel 11 (king of the south)

daniel 11 (king of the south)

first thing to do is look for the

Abomination of desolation

the re-dedication of the Temple to Zeus by Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 167 BC,

the worship of the Roman Standards on the Temple Mount under Titus in 70 AD
and
the building of the Dome of the Rock by the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan in 691 AD.

which one did Jesus refer to?

in matthew 24:2 Jesus is clearly referring to the destruction of the temple in 70 ad

in matthew 24:15 Jesus must be referring to the dome of the rock

the umayyad caliph must be the king of the north

so

who is the king of the south?

and

who is his daughter?

ali who married fatimah the daughter of mohammed fought with muawiyah, the first umayyad caliph, for control of the islamic empire

muawiyah won and moved the capital north to damascus
 
Last edited:
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
has anyone heard a more reasonable explanation for the king of the south?

during the last half of the seventh century
there was a continuous battle for control of islam
between
what would become the sunnis of the north
and
the shiites of the south

the shiites wanted a descendant of mohammed to rule
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
you get this Rashidun
if
you search rightly guided

"They were all close companions of Muhammad, and his relatives: the daughters of Abu Bakr and Umar were married to Muhammad, and three of Muhammad's daughters[citation needed] were married to Uthman and Ali. Likewise, their succession was not hereditary, something that would become the custom after them, beginning with the subsequent Umayyad Caliphate. Council decision or caliph's choice determined the successor originally."

daniel 11 is all about the struggle for control after mohammed, the king of the south died
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
it is hard to interpret parts of the bible without being politically incorrect
but
somebody has to do it
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
SaulToPaul said:
What does the Magisterium say?
Click to expand...

the church does not have an official position on this
-but
-others are encouraged to research this
-the church is necessarily politically correct
-so
-you won't hear any suggestions that islam is a beast
-you might hear catholic writers suggest
-Antiochus IV Epiphanes
-as the king of the south
-I consider that ridiculous
 
W

Wick Stick

Well-known member
chrysostom said:
-so who do you think
-is
-the king of the south?
Click to expand...
You are correct that the beasts are empires, and baddies. You just connected the dots in the wrong order.

The Egyptian empire of the Ptolemies was the "king of the south." It is NOT the 4th beast.

The "king of the north" was the Seleucid empire. THIS is the 4th beast.

The abomination that causes desolation is a man sitting in the temple, showing everyone that he is God. 2Thess 2:3-4.

This did not happen with Islam. It did happen with the Seleucids. It happened again in the first century when Eleazar ben Simon made the Zealot's headquarters in the Temple in the months preceding the Roman's siege of the city.

Jarrod
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top