https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&feedformat=atom&user=KriegerdwmConservapedia - User contributions [en]2026-10-26T09:56:51ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.35.14https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6995552300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-09-11T03:12:47Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, [[Sepensationalism|Dispensationalists]]<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |author=Taze Russell| publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author=Jason Wallace| publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''| publisher=<br />
The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=651795Antichrist2009-04-11T21:35:35Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Titles of the Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18:1-24, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog)<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology)| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18:1-24. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref>, R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref> and Tim LaHaye<ref>{{cite web| title=the Coming Peace in the Middle East| url=https://timlahaye.com/| publisher=Tim LaHaye Ministries}}</ref> of the famed ''[[Left Behind]] Series''.<br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==Titles of the Antichrist==<br />
<br />
Arthur Pink<ref>{{cite web| title=Arthur Walkington Pink's Archive| url=http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/pinks_archive.htm| publisher=Providence Baptist Ministries}}</ref> (See: ''The Antichrist''<ref>{{cite web| title=the Antichrist| url=http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Antichrist/antichrist.htm| author=Arthur Pink| publisher=Providence Baptist Ministries}}</ref>) and Doug Krieger,<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist, Reflections on the Desolator| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> as well as many, especially Premillenial<ref>{{cite web| title=What is premillennialism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> Evangelicals,<ref>{{cite web| title=What is Evangelicalism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/evangelicalism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> extrapolate titles of the [[End Times]] Antichrist from both Testaments of the Bible; to name but a few:<br />
<br />
<br />
1. The Antichrist- {{bibleverse|I|John|2:22|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
2. The Man of Sin – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
3. The Lawless One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:9|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
4. The Beast – {{bibleverse||Rev.|11:7|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
5. The Bloody and Deceitful Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|5:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
6. The Wicked One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
7. The Man of the Earth – {{bibleverse||Psalm|10:18|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
8. The Mighty Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|52:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
9. The Enemy – {{bibleverse||Psalm|55:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
10.The Adversary – {{bibleverse||Psalm|74:8-10|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
11.The Head Over Many Countries – {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
12.The Violent Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|140:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
13.The Assyrian – {{bibleverse||Isa.|10:5-12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
14.The King of Babylon – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
15.The Son of the Morning – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
16.The Abominable Branch – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:19|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
17.The Spoiler – {{bibleverse||Isa.|16:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
18.The Nail – {{bibleverse||Isa.|22:25|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
19.The Branch of the Terrible Ones – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|21:25-27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
20.The King of Tyre – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|28:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
21.The Little (i.e., "Younger") Horn – {{bibleverse||Daniel|7:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
22.The Head Over Many Countries- {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
23.The Coming Prince – {{bibleverse||Dan.|9:26|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
24.The Vile (or Despicable) Person – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:21|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
25.The Willful King – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:3|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:36|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
26.The Idol Shepherd – {{bibleverse||Zech.|11:16-17|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
27.The Angel of the Bottomless Pit – {{bibleverse||Rev.|9:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
28.The Son of Perdition – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
29.The Desolator – {{bibleverse||Daniel|9:27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
30.The [[Abomination of Desolation]] – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:31|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Daniel|12:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
31.God of Fortresses – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:38|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=651785Antichrist2009-04-11T21:27:29Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18:1-24, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog)<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology)| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18:1-24. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref>, R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref> and Tim LaHaye<ref>{{cite web| title=the Coming Peace in the Middle East| url=https://timlahaye.com/| publisher=Tim LaHaye Ministries}}</ref> of the famed ''[[Left Behind]] Series''.<br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==Titles of the Antichrist==<br />
<br />
Arthur Pink<ref>{{cite web| title=Arthur Walkington Pink's Archive| url=http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/pinks_archive.htm| publisher=Providence Baptist Ministries}}</ref> and Doug Krieger,<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist, Reflections on the Desolator| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> as well as many, especially Premillenial<ref>{{cite web| title=What is premillennialism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> Evangelicals,<ref>{{cite web| title=What is Evangelicalism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/evangelicalism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> extrapolate titles of the [[End Times]] Antichrist from both Testaments of the Bible; to name but a few:<br />
<br />
<br />
1. The Antichrist- {{bibleverse|I|John|2:22|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
2. The Man of Sin – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
3. The Lawless One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:9|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
4. The Beast – {{bibleverse||Rev.|11:7|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
5. The Bloody and Deceitful Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|5:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
6. The Wicked One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
7. The Man of the Earth – {{bibleverse||Psalm|10:18|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
8. The Mighty Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|52:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
9. The Enemy – {{bibleverse||Psalm|55:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
10.The Adversary – {{bibleverse||Psalm|74:8-10|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
11.The Head Over Many Countries – {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
12.The Violent Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|140:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
13.The Assyrian – {{bibleverse||Isa.|10:5-12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
14.The King of Babylon – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
15.The Son of the Morning – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
16.The Abominable Branch – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:19|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
17.The Spoiler – {{bibleverse||Isa.|16:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
18.The Nail – {{bibleverse||Isa.|22:25|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
19.The Branch of the Terrible Ones – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|21:25-27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
20.The King of Tyre – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|28:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
21.The Little (i.e., "Younger") Horn – {{bibleverse||Daniel|7:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
22.The Head Over Many Countries- {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
23.The Coming Prince – {{bibleverse||Dan.|9:26|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
24.The Vile (or Despicable) Person – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:21|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
25.The Willful King – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:3|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:36|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
26.The Idol Shepherd – {{bibleverse||Zech.|11:16-17|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
27.The Angel of the Bottomless Pit – {{bibleverse||Rev.|9:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
28.The Son of Perdition – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
29.The Desolator – {{bibleverse||Daniel|9:27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
30.The [[Abomination of Desolation]] – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:31|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Daniel|12:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
31.God of Fortresses – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:38|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=651782Antichrist2009-04-11T21:25:28Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18<ref>{{bibleverse|Revelation|18|NKJV}}</ref>, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog)<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology)| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18:1-24. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref>, R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref> and Tim LaHaye<ref>{{cite web| title=the Coming Peace in the Middle East| url=https://timlahaye.com/| publisher=Tim LaHaye Ministries}}</ref> of the famed ''[[Left Behind]] Series''.<br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==Titles of the Antichrist==<br />
<br />
Arthur Pink<ref>{{cite web| title=Arthur Walkington Pink's Archive| url=http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/pinks_archive.htm| publisher=Providence Baptist Ministries}}</ref> and Doug Krieger,<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist, Reflections on the Desolator| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> as well as many, especially Premillenial<ref>{{cite web| title=What is premillennialism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> Evangelicals,<ref>{{cite web| title=What is Evangelicalism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/evangelicalism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> extrapolate titles of the [[End Times]] Antichrist from both Testaments of the Bible; to name but a few:<br />
<br />
<br />
1. The Antichrist- {{bibleverse|I|John|2:22|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
2. The Man of Sin – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
3. The Lawless One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:9|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
4. The Beast – {{bibleverse||Rev.|11:7|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
5. The Bloody and Deceitful Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|5:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
6. The Wicked One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
7. The Man of the Earth – {{bibleverse||Psalm|10:18|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
8. The Mighty Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|52:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
9. The Enemy – {{bibleverse||Psalm|55:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
10.The Adversary – {{bibleverse||Psalm|74:8-10|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
11.The Head Over Many Countries – {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
12.The Violent Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|140:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
13.The Assyrian – {{bibleverse||Isa.|10:5-12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
14.The King of Babylon – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
15.The Son of the Morning – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
16.The Abominable Branch – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:19|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
17.The Spoiler – {{bibleverse||Isa.|16:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
18.The Nail – {{bibleverse||Isa.|22:25|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
19.The Branch of the Terrible Ones – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|21:25-27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
20.The King of Tyre – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|28:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
21.The Little (i.e., "Younger") Horn – {{bibleverse||Daniel|7:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
22.The Head Over Many Countries- {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
23.The Coming Prince – {{bibleverse||Dan.|9:26|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
24.The Vile (or Despicable) Person – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:21|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
25.The Willful King – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:3|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:36|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
26.The Idol Shepherd – {{bibleverse||Zech.|11:16-17|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
27.The Angel of the Bottomless Pit – {{bibleverse||Rev.|9:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
28.The Son of Perdition – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
29.The Desolator – {{bibleverse||Daniel|9:27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
30.The [[Abomination of Desolation]] – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:31|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Daniel|12:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
31.God of Fortresses – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:38|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=651777Antichrist2009-04-11T21:21:50Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog)<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology)| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18:1-24. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref>, R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref> and Tim LaHaye<ref>{{cite web| title=the Coming Peace in the Middle East| url=https://timlahaye.com/| publisher=Tim LaHaye Ministries}}</ref> of the famed ''[[Left Behind]] Series''.<br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==Titles of the Antichrist==<br />
<br />
Arthur Pink<ref>{{cite web| title=Arthur Walkington Pink's Archive| url=http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/pinks_archive.htm| publisher=Providence Baptist Ministries}}</ref> and Doug Krieger,<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist, Reflections on the Desolator| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> as well as many, especially Premillenial<ref>{{cite web| title=What is premillennialism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> Evangelicals,<ref>{{cite web| title=What is Evangelicalism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/evangelicalism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> extrapolate titles of the [[End Times]] Antichrist from both Testaments of the Bible; to name but a few:<br />
<br />
<br />
1. The Antichrist- {{bibleverse|I|John|2:22|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
2. The Man of Sin – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
3. The Lawless One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:9|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
4. The Beast – {{bibleverse||Rev.|11:7|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
5. The Bloody and Deceitful Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|5:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
6. The Wicked One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
7. The Man of the Earth – {{bibleverse||Psalm|10:18|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
8. The Mighty Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|52:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
9. The Enemy – {{bibleverse||Psalm|55:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
10.The Adversary – {{bibleverse||Psalm|74:8-10|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
11.The Head Over Many Countries – {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
12.The Violent Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|140:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
13.The Assyrian – {{bibleverse||Isa.|10:5-12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
14.The King of Babylon – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
15.The Son of the Morning – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
16.The Abominable Branch – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:19|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
17.The Spoiler – {{bibleverse||Isa.|16:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
18.The Nail – {{bibleverse||Isa.|22:25|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
19.The Branch of the Terrible Ones – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|21:25-27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
20.The King of Tyre – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|28:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
21.The Little (i.e., "Younger") Horn – {{bibleverse||Daniel|7:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
22.The Head Over Many Countries- {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
23.The Coming Prince – {{bibleverse||Dan.|9:26|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
24.The Vile (or Despicable) Person – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:21|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
25.The Willful King – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:3|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:36|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
26.The Idol Shepherd – {{bibleverse||Zech.|11:16-17|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
27.The Angel of the Bottomless Pit – {{bibleverse||Rev.|9:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
28.The Son of Perdition – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
29.The Desolator – {{bibleverse||Daniel|9:27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
30.The [[Abomination of Desolation]] – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:31|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Daniel|12:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
31.God of Fortresses – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:38|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=651773Antichrist2009-04-11T21:06:47Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog)<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology)| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18:1-24. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==Titles of the Antichrist==<br />
<br />
Arthur Pink<ref>{{cite web| title=Arthur Walkington Pink's Archive| url=http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/pinks_archive.htm| publisher=Providence Baptist Ministries}}</ref> and Doug Krieger,<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist, Reflections on the Desolator| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> as well as many, especially Premillenial<ref>{{cite web| title=What is premillennialism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> Evangelicals,<ref>{{cite web| title=What is Evangelicalism?| url=http://www.gotquestions.org/evangelicalism.html| publisher=gotQuestions?org}}</ref> extrapolate titles of the [[End Times]] Antichrist from both Testaments of the Bible; to name but a few:<br />
<br />
<br />
1. The Antichrist- {{bibleverse|I|John|2:22|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
2. The Man of Sin – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
3. The Lawless One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:9|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
4. The Beast – {{bibleverse||Rev.|11:7|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
5. The Bloody and Deceitful Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|5:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
6. The Wicked One – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
7. The Man of the Earth – {{bibleverse||Psalm|10:18|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
8. The Mighty Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|52:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
9. The Enemy – {{bibleverse||Psalm|55:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
10.The Adversary – {{bibleverse||Psalm|74:8-10|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
11.The Head Over Many Countries – {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
12.The Violent Man – {{bibleverse||Psalm|140:1|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
13.The Assyrian – {{bibleverse||Isa.|10:5-12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
14.The King of Babylon – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
15.The Son of the Morning – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
16.The Abominable Branch – {{bibleverse||Isa.|14:19|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
17.The Spoiler – {{bibleverse||Isa.|16:4|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
18.The Nail – {{bibleverse||Isa.|22:25|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
19.The Branch of the Terrible Ones – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|21:25-27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
20.The King of Tyre – {{bibleverse||Ezk.|28:12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
21.The Little (i.e., "Younger") Horn – {{bibleverse||Daniel|7:8|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
22.The Head Over Many Countries- {{bibleverse||Psalm|110:6|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
23.The Coming Prince – {{bibleverse||Dan.|9:26|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
24.The Vile (or Despicable) Person – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:21|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
25.The Willful King – {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:3|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Dan.|11:36|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
26.The Idol Shepherd – {{bibleverse||Zech.|11:16-17|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
27.The Angel of the Bottomless Pit – {{bibleverse||Rev.|9:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
28.The Son of Perdition – {{bibleverse|II|Thess.|2:3|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
29.The Desolator – {{bibleverse||Daniel|9:27|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
30.The [[Abomination of Desolation]] – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:31|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Daniel|12:11|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
31.God of Fortresses – {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:38|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=647817Abomination of Desolation2009-04-02T15:04:55Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks ({{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}). Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9:27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast''' (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) The calculation of the 1010 days of sacrifice is determined by subtracting the 1290 days of desolation found in Daniel 12:11 from the total of 2300 days found in Daniel 8:13-14. Krieger claims that the thirty day extension of the 1290-1260 = 30 days expands as follows: (1) The final half of Daniel's Seventieth Week concludes at the terminus of the 1260 days which will be the prewrath rapture of the Church and the sealing of National Israel; (2) the 30 days beyond the 1260 day latter half of Daniel's Seventieth Week will be the period of the "Wrath of God" or the "Wrath of the Lamb" found in Revelation 14:17-20 or the conclusion of the Armageddon Campaign - i.e., "the Battle of Armageddon" (Revelation 16:16); (3) at the conclusion of the 1290th Day will be the Second Coming of Christ, the Messiah, to the earth; and (4) the 45 day extension beyond the 1290th Day or until the 1335th Day mentioned in Daniel 12:12 will be the period of time in which Messiah shall unveil or reveal Himself to National Israel and the fulfillment of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days" (Daniel 12:12) will be fulfilled (cf. Romans 11:26-27; Luke 13:35). The initial 250 days of the first half of Daniel's Seventieth Week will initiate in the "Treaty of Death and Hell" between Antichrist and Israel's majority (Daniel 9:27; Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:18) and almost immediately thereafter will be what is known as the Gog - Magog War (See: Daniel 11:40-43 and Ezekiel 38:1-23 and Ezekiel 39:1-16). This will be during the first 40 days of the Seventieth Week and then in the aftermath of the Gog-Magog War it will take some seven months (i.e., 210 days or 7 x 30 = 210 - see Ezekiel 39:7) - this brings one to the 250th day of the first half of Daniel's Seventieth Week, leaving an additional 1010 days of "sacrifice" which would constitute the entire first half of the Seventieth Week (or - 40 days + 210 days + 1010 days = 1260 days or 3 1/2 years or 3.5 days of a week). Then will come the Abomination of Desolation and the 1290 days of abominations mentioned in Daniel 12:11.<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=647812Abomination of Desolation2009-04-02T15:01:44Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks ({{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}). Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9:27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast''' (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) The calculation of the 1010 days of sacrifice is determined by subtracting the 1290 days of desolation found in Daniel 12:11 from the total of 2300 days found in Daniel 8:13-14. Krieger claims that the thirty day extension of the 1290-1260 = 30 days expands as follows: (1) The final half of Daniel's Seventieth Week concludes at the terminus of the 1260 days which will be the prewrath rapture of the Church and the sealing of National Israel; (2) the 30 days beyond the 1260 day latter half of Daniel's Seventieth Week will be the period of the "Wrath of God" or the "Wrath of the Lamb" found in Revelation 14:17-20 or the conclusion of the Armageddon Campaign - i.e., "the Battle of Armageddon" (Revelation 16:16); (3) at the conclusion of the 1290th Day will be the Second Coming of Christ, the Messiah, to the earth; and (4) the 45 day extension beyond the 1290th Day or until the 1335th Day mentioned in Daniel 12:12 will be the period of time in which Messiah shall unveil or reveal Himself to National Israel and the fulfillment of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days" (Daniel 12:12) will be fulfilled (cf. Romans 11:26-27; Luke 13:35). The initial 250 days of the first half of Daniel's Seventieth Week will initiate in the "Treaty of Death and Hell" between Antichrist and Israel's majority (Daniel 9:27; Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:18) and almost immediately thereafter will be what is known as the Gog - Magog War (See: Daniel 11:40-43 and Ezekiel 38:1-23 and Ezekiel 39:1-16). This will be during the first 40 days of the Seventieth Week and then in the aftermath of the Gog-Magog War it will take some seven months (i.e., 210 days or 7 x 30 = 210 - see Ezekiel 39:7) - this brings one to the 250th day of the first half of Daniel's Seventieth Week, leaving an additional 1010 days of "sacrifice" which would constitute the entire first half of the Seventieth Week (or - 40 days + 210 days + 1010 days = 1260 days or 3 1/2 years or 3.5 days of a week).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=647810Abomination of Desolation2009-04-02T15:00:49Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks ({{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}). Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9:27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast''' (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) The calculation of the 1010 days of sacrifice is determined by subtracting the 1290 days of desolation found in Daniel 12:11 from the total of 2300 days found in Daniel 8:13-14. Krieger claims that the thirty day extension of the 1290-1260 = 30 days expands as follows: (1) The final half of Daniel's Seventieth Week concludes at the terminus of the 1260 days which will be the prewrath rapture of the Church and the sealing of National Israel; (2) the 30 days beyond the 1260 day latter half of Daniel's Seventieth Week will be the period of the "Wrath of God" or the "Wrath of the Lamb" found in revelation 14:17-20 or the conclusion of the Armageddon Campaign - i.e., "the Battle of Armageddon" (Revelation 16:16); (3) at the conclusion of the 1290th Day will be the Second Coming of Christ, the Messiah, to the earth; and (4) the 45 day extension beyond the 1290th Day or until the 1335th Day mentioned in Daniel 12:12 will be the period of time in which Messiah shall unveil or reveal Himself to National Israel and the fulfillment of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days" (Daniel 12:12) will be fulfilled (cf. Romans 11:26-27; Luke 13:35). The initial 250 days of the first half of Daniel's Seventieth Week will initiate in the "Treaty of Death and Hell" between Antichrist and Israel's majority (Daniel 9:27; Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:18) and almost immediately thereafter will be what is known as the Gog - Magog War (See: Daniel 11:40-43 and Ezekiel 38:1-23 and Ezekiel 39:1-16). This will be during the first 40 days of the Seventieth Week and then in the aftermath of the Gog-Magog War it will take some seven months (i.e., 210 days or 7 x 30 = 210 - see Ezekiel 39:7) - this brings one to the 250th day of the first half of Daniel's Seventieth Week, leaving an additional 1010 days of "sacrifice" which would constitute the entire first half of the Seventieth Week (or - 40 days + 210 days + 1010 days = 1260 days or 3 1/2 years or 3.5 days of a week).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=647800Abomination of Desolation2009-04-02T14:41:14Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks ({{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}). Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9:27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast''' (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) <br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=647799Abomination of Desolation2009-04-02T14:38:34Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks ({{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}). Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9;27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast''' (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) <br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia&diff=645899Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia2009-03-29T04:13:37Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Thank you as well! */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{unprotect|Ed Poor}}<br />
{| align=right border=3 cellspacing=0 style="border-width: 5px; border-color: #d0d0d0; background: #d0e0e0; margin: 2em;"<br />
| style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | [[/Archives|Archives]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<!-- ===============Archive below this line! Do not remove anything above this line.=========================== --><br />
<br />
==Farah Quote==<br />
<br />
The Joseph Farah quote on Wikipedia is good, but it's at the top of this page and at the top of the [[Wikipedia]] page. I think that one appearance of the quote is enough and that it fits in better on the wikipedia page. Does anyone else have an opinion? [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 13:18, 22 February 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
: I agree. You can move it into a new paragraph. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:53, 22 February 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
:: Done. [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 14:10, 22 February 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
==Religious affiliation of Wikipedians==<br />
I edited several wikipedian user templates so that templates identifying one with religion a or atheism etc. will result in you being put in that category for example several atheist wikipedian user templates now put the user in the category Category:Atheist Wikipedians, if he/she puts the template on their userpage, revealing our current estimated amount of atheist/ and others is greatly underestimated there is 1722 atheist Wikipedians of which 17 are objectivist. Also we forgot agnostics there is 515 of them numbering about as much as the christian sample of wikipedia alone. There should be a part on the picture where it reveals the sample size. that means there is 2222 atheist or agnostics out of our sample wow! Way more than the sample for christians Please update the picture showing religious affiliation of Wikipedians--[[User:Java7837|Java7837]] 16:22, 28 February 2008 (EST)<br />
:Actually, I'd like to know where that graph came from in the first place. It was put there by [[user:Wahrheit|Wahrheit]], but I've not seen any explanation of where the figures came from. Unless Wahrheit can explain that, I think the graph should be removed as possibly bogus. And by the way, the graph ''does'' include agnostics, and how does 515 <s>outnumber</s> mean "about as much as" 789, the figure shown for Christians? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:32, 28 February 2008 (EST)<br />
::As there has been no explanation of the origin or basis of that graph, I will remove it as I suggested above. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 19:25, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== "Wikipedia has been called the National Enquirer of the Internet:[1]" ==<br />
<br />
I'm removing this claim because the source is very flimsy. An inactive blog written by a self proclaimed "eccentric" isn't a powerful enough position to put such a quote in the banner. [[User:Qc|Qc]] 18:57, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Isn't the National Enquirer the National Enquirer of the internet? Seems a bit like saying "The Beatles are the Rolling Stones of music." [[User:MrGrieves|MrGrieves]] 01:42, 6 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Graph: Number of people claiming a faith = 2179; Number of atheists = 1508. ==<br />
<br />
Is it just me, or are there more people of faith on wikipedia than atheists?<br />
<br />
The graph shows that the number of people claiming a faith = 2179 whilst the number of atheists = 1508.<br />
<br />
That's 60% believes, versus 40% disbelieves.<br />
<br />
Is wikipedia in fact "<U>faithist</U>"?<br />
<br />
It makes me wonder if we have any statistics regarding the number of atheists on Conserapedia versus the numbers from the faith groups? <br />
<br />
I really hope that Conservapedia (unlike wikipedia) is not bias to any one faith group. <br />
<br />
It would be a sorry day for "The Trustworthy Encyclopaedia" if it was dominated by any one faith group; would that be health, surely we wouldn’t want any one group’s view to dominate the others …<br />
<br />
Well lets hope not ...<br />
<br />
{{unsigned|Qgobo}}<br />
<br />
:Conservapedia is a conservative Christian resource primarily, I believe. That is the main viewpoint espoused, and I think the stated purpose.--[[User:TomMoore|TomMoore]] 23:07, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::: Tom, isn't that rather the point, wikipedia isn't a "Christian resource primarily", and thus it should be allowed to express a view other than the one seen here. If bias means subscribing to primarily one doctrine, then wikipedia is less bias than conservapedia. Wouldn't a better title for this page be "Where and how Wikipedia differs from Conservapedia"? However, perhaps your broader point is that no one here is receptive to my point of view so I should gently move on. [[User:Qgobo|Qgobo]] 23:51, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
[[Faith]] is a uniquely Christian concept. It is being used incorrectly above.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:10, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Jews, Hindus, Muslims would be interested to know that. --[[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 10:22, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:: Aschlafly - please read "people of faith" in the above comments to mean "non-atheists". {{unsigned|Qgobo}}<br />
<br />
::: That's a meaningless category. It's like making a category of all voters whose last name begins with "A". They disagree among themselves.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:03, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Not true - this article is about how atheists bias wikipedia. Thus, comparison with the group “Non-atheist” is not arbitrary selection at all. It is the logical selection of the group of people on wikipedia who are not atheists i.e. the opposite group to the atheist group. <br />
<br />
:::: I believe what you really dislike about my point is that christians have been lumped-in with the other faith groups! If this is your point then forget the atheist and focus on the “non-christians” on wikipedia as a group, then you can see the christians are sorely out-numbered and that wikipedia is blatantly anti-christian website (despite being the largest <s>faith</s> {non- atheists} group on it). <br />
<br />
:::: Also, if you do not view the “other faith groups” as proper “faith groups” why are they even on your chart? Why not have “christians vs atheist” or “christians vs non-christians” . Either of these would seem more logical based on your statements above. - [[User:Qgobo|Qgobo]] 00:33, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
The meaning of "faith" is something on which I disagree with Andy. So my answer is that you can't divide the groups into "faith" and "non-faith". They ''all'' have faith: Atheists have faith that God doesn't exist.<br />
<br />
Further, the group "non-Atheist" is just as arbitrary as "non-Christian", "non-Muslim", "non-Jewish", etc.<br />
<br />
The claim that "wikipedia is less bias[ed] than conservapedia" is a very doubtful one, given that it treats the atheistic view of origins as fact and the biblical view as pseudoscience.<br />
<br />
Qgobo's comment that we don't want the encyclopedia dominated by one faith falsely presumes that the one faith is not the correct one.<br />
<br />
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:27, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Very well put, Philip, without conceding your broader definition of [[faith]]. Your observation is insightful given your broader definition.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:52, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention that American atheists give significantly less to charity than American theists on a per capita basis.[11] <br />
<br />
doesn't this seem like a moot point simply because of the number difference does the wikipedia article mention that in the more atheistic countries it's the opposite?<br />
<br />
== People for the American Way ==<br />
<br />
Granted that Wikipedia does not use the word "liberal" when describing People for the American Way, but it also does not use the word "conservative" when describing the National Right to Life Committee. Wikipedia's conservative bias perhaps? [[User:Blinkadyblink|Blinkadyblink]] 23:33, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: That does look biased. Good catch, except realize Wikipedia editors think "conservative" is pejorative term.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:45, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
::Good thing this site shows it's better by not simply inverting that. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 01:28, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Why some of these problems don't count==<br />
Biases such as a lack of Biography on conservatives, here is the soltion. ADD THEM! An expert (presumably a conservative) has to write the article. There are more bios on Liberals because there are more people writing about them. Seperating to another website will not encourage what you believe to be true! It means that conservatives and Liberals stay wrong about things. Go and add the Bio, don't write it here!<br />
<br />
Number 50. Dismisses the banner saying that an article doesn't represent a world view, and you argue that there is no world view. By your own admission, there is no one view that represents all people of the world. Due to this, it would be necessary to tell people when something is Western centric, or American Centric. An article on Gun law, for example, could not be reliable from an American view because (unlike many countries) guns are supported in the constitution. 50 isa contradiction.<br />
<br />
{{unsigned|Margheritapizza}}<br />
<br />
: No, you're wrong. Adding a biography on a conservative can result in its deletion or redirect by the [[Wikipedia police]], even though [[Wikipedia]] has thousands of entries about obscure liberals.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:12, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::I've read your article on the wikipedia police, and I wonder why there isn't an article on the conservapedia police because it seems like there are around 5 people on conservapedia who do everything. [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 22:04, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::Regarding deletion of bios of conservative people: If you can back up your biography with plenty of sources independent of the subject, then the "police" will approve. For more check out Wikipedia's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people) notability guideline for people]. Notability trumps any ideology, liberal, conservative, moderate, libertarian, radical, you-name-it. --[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 19:38, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::Wikipedia does not follow its own policies. If wikipedia was actually neutral, why would it delete the page for Al Gore III [http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=Uncensored:Al_Gore_III] while keeping the page for Mary Cheney [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Cheney]? [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 20:59, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::Regarding Al Gore III: the article was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Al_Gore_III_(8th_nomination) deleted in February 2008] after Wikipedians decided that they just couldn't write a biography of him that met the "biographies of living persons" and "notability (people)" standards. If you actually read the Wikitruth archived version you provided, you'll probably find out that it's full of gossip and doesn't explain ''why'' he's relevant to the world beyond being given his 15 news headlines of fame due to minor injuries and run-ins with the law. Furthermore, WP's people notability page states that "notability is not inherited" - in other words just because a certain person meets WP's notability standard doesn't mean that his/her friends, relatives, or associates are as well. Among all the sources cited in that "article", the sources that focus on him are about his legal run-ins, and the less distressing sources have him not as the focus of the article.<br />
:::::On the other hand regarding Mary Cheney: the article does assert that she is relevant to society, as she has worked for Coors (one of the most prominent beer breweries in America) and the Bush/Cheney 2004 campaign, and her "marriage" has been a subject of much debate in the news media given VP Cheney's opposition to same-sex marriage. She also wrote an autobiography that was published in 2006.<br />
:::::Thus, WP deleted the Al Gore III article but kept the Mary Cheney article because Cheney is so much more noted and discussed in the media than AG3 has been. BTW, I'll go on WP later and expand on AG3 on the Al Gore article.--[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 19:56, 30 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==WP: Sexist?==<br />
Wh...what? How does that prove anything? Then again, it IS pretty much on-par with the rest of the petty claims on the page... [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 17:12, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Reversion==<br />
I looked up WPs Hamas article, and it describes them as a militant organization, with the rider that the US state dept etc etc as per the linked claim. [[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 18:40, 12 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Partially true; to quote the article: "Hamas was created in 1987 by the terrorist Sheikh Ahmed Yassin." More to the point, Wikipedia's article on Al-Qaeda directly calls it a terrorist organization with no peddle-footing around. Therefore, the cited quote is still false in that it specifically says Wikipedia does not call Al-Qaeda a terrorist organization. The quote is false and should be removed. [[User:Deweyman|Deweyman]] 23:05, 12 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
::Scratch that. The "Hamas was created in 1987 by the terrorist Sheikh Ahmed Yassin" quote was just added by an IP address today and could possibly be reverted. However, the Isreali Media quote is still wrong due to the Al-Qaeda issue, as much as I agree of Wikipedia's bias. [[User:Deweyman|Deweyman]] 23:13, 12 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::I removed the article again today. If someone were to look up Wikipedia's Al-Qaeda article and discover that we were perpetuating false information, it would damage our credibility. The truth alone is an incredibly strong case against Wikipedia, so we don't need to give anyone reason to believe otherwise. [[User:Deweyman|Deweyman]] 22:04, 16 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: You deleted an accurate quotation of an observation that is substantially true. In the Al-Qaeda entry on Wikipedia that you cite as a counter-example, Wikipedia uses the term "militant" repeatedly to describe the organization and only uses the term "terrorist" in the context of official government descriptions of the organization.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:54, 16 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::Respectfully, the first sentence of wikipedia's article is ''"Al Qaeda is an international alliance of Islamic militant terrorist organizations founded in 1988."'' Then, yes, it goes on to list the nations that consider it a terrorist organization. It should also be noted that it describes its attacks as "terrorist attacks". [[User:Deweyman|Deweyman]] 17:36, 18 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==43==<br />
Ad hominem against atheists on Number 43. And don't attack me as being a devil worshipper/satanist/atheist: I'm catholic. [[User:Mwaetht|Mwaetht]] 13:53, 23 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
P.S. On 49: Ever hear of Project Steve?<br />
: How is No. 33 an ''ad hominem'' argument? An ''ad hominem'' argument is where you attack the person rather than their argument. No. 43 is not attacking atheists; it's attacking Wikipedia's treatment of atheism.<br />
: And "Ever hear of Project Steve?" (yes I have; so what?) is not a refutation of anything.<br />
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:28, 25 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Smoking example ==<br />
<br />
I'm confused about the smoking example that you just added. Is the implication meant to be that smoking isn't dangerous? [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:02, 23 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Yes, I take it from Ted's edit that Wikipedia wants to downplay the dangers of smoking. Could be tobacco industry types editing on Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:07, 23 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Moved from being inappropriately put in a user's personal talk page ==<br />
<br />
== Question ==<br />
<br />
Hello. I'm a long time wikipedia editor, and as such am fairly insulted at your harsh criticism of wikipeda. On the allegations of bias...since conservapedia openly admits being conservatively biased, doesn't that make it even worse than wikipedia? Not that Wikipedia is biased...how can an encyclopedia anyone can edit be biased? [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 01:25, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
And as far as your criticisms of Wikipedia's scope and content...isn't having a larger scope better? Also, you criticized it for having pornographic images and articles. That is true, but isn't it better to have articles that describe things such as pornography and other non-child friendly things in an accurate way? Or is it better to pretend they don't exist? [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 01:29, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
: My [[Essay: Accuracy vs. neutrality on Conservapedia]] goes part way to answering your questions. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:36, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I still vehemently disagree about Wikipedia's bias. Anyone can edit Wikipeda, and thus, as long as the change is not biased, it will not be reverted. There is no "ruling class" on Wikipedia--all editors are equal to the others. [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 10:32, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
:From personal experience, I can vouch for that not being the case. For example, see the Intelligent Design article (my comments relate to around January/February 2007, which I last seriously looked at it). It was not an article ''about'' Intelligent Design, but an article about why Intelligent Design was wrong. And ''numerous'' editors either tried changing it or discussing changes on the talk pages, only to have their changes reversed, their discussions shouted down, themselves called trolls and various other names, and generally grilled and harassed to the point that they either left or blew their stack, giving the controlling editors, which included sysops, the excuse to block them. It truly was a mobocracy. I found similar control existed over all articles to do with creationism. I was never blocked on Wikipedia, but I left active editing because of the oppressive regime active in those sorts of articles. See my [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philip_J._Rayment Wikipedia user page] for more detail. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:47, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Well, remember what neutrality is. Neutrality does '''not''' mean "give both sides equal weight", it means "give both sides equal weight according to the strength of their argument". [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 10:52, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
: In other words, if a majority of editors consider that the strength of the anti-ID argument is greater than the strength of the pro-ID argument, then an article supposedly ''about'' Intelligent Design can have an anti-ID stance. In which case, it comes down to the number of anti-ID editors vs. the number of pro-ID editors, which is ''not'' neutrality, but majority rule. Secondly, your definition is self-contradictory. "according to the strength of their argument" means "give the side with the stronger argument more weight", which is the opposite of "give both sides equal weight". And finally, giving the stronger argument more weight may (in principle) be ''fair'', but it's hardly ''neutral''. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:00, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
You misunderstand me. What I mean is that the article takes a critical look at ID because of the overwhelming number of qualified scientists who are opposed to it, compared to those who favor it. In this case, neutrality does not mean give both sides equal weight in the article, it means give the side that has more reliable sources supporting it the greater coverage. [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 11:30, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: There is no evidence that "overwhelming number of qualified scientists ... are opposed" to ID. Moreover, it's a meaningless statistic anyway; 30 years ago an "overwhelming number of qualified scientists" insisted that there was life in outer space. By relying on this approach, you have illustrated an example of point 11 of [[liberal style]]: overreliance on [[hearsay]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:03, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Most scientists believed there was life in outer space? Have any proof for that statement? Sounds like you are being a good liberal and relying on hearsay!--[[User:Mathewson|Mathewson]] 12:06, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Mathewson, I'm afraid you're clueless. Please stick around here and learn some things '''with an open mind'''. It's common knowledge that a generation ago scientists overwhelmingly believed in life in outer space. See, e.g., [[Exobiology]]. Rest assured I was not ''relying'' on what a majority of scientists reportedly believed. You are.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:40, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::No, my friend, I am far from clueless. You made the claim that an ""overwhelming number of qualified scientists" insisted that there was life in outer space." Can you provide any cites proving that this statement is correct?--[[User:Mathewson|Mathewson]] 12:49, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Life in space has been neither proven nor disproven; and for that matter, it can't be disproven since the universe is theoretically (or at least practically) infinite in size. It could only be proven, and only then by finding life in space. But that is besides the point. Any encyclopedia should strive to provide its readers with the most accurate and up-to-date information from people who actually know what they're talking about. As such, Wikipedia is right in down-playing the supporters of ID...because there are very few reputable ones. if you have any examples of reputable supporters of ID, please tell me. [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 12:51, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Folks, I'm not going to allow the repetition of [[liberal]] falsehoods on my own talk page. Please illustrate point 11 of [[liberal style]] somewhere else. In response to Mathewson above, I did provide a cite, and am not confident he read it with an open mind.<br />
<br />
: Further attempts at [[liberal]] [[last wordism]] on my personal talk page may result in a short block of the offending account.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:04, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Translation: "It's my website, so I get the last word." (Go ahead and reply to this one, Andy. I just wanted to point out the blatant hypocrisy here.) --[[User:Gulik5|Gulik5]] 14:54, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Gulik5, you're clueless also. We've always had a policy of respect on Conservapedia for everyone's talk page, in contrast with [[Wikipedia]]. See point 11 in [[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]]. Insist on [[last wordism]] on my talk page and you'll then see an example of an account being blocked for violating this principle.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:01, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I wasn't aware I was trying to get the last word, I thought we were having a conversation. [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 16:32, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Maths, anyone? ==<br />
<br />
''"Wikipedia asserts that "One 1987 estimate found that more than 99.84% of almost 500,000 US scientists in the earth and life sciences supported evolution over creation science."[76] This statement is false, but Wikipedians won't correct it and it has been repeated thousands of times by other liberals in reliance on Wikipedia.[77] The truth is that 700 scientists signed a statement rejecting evolution, but evolutionists then made the illogical claim that every other scientist must support evolution.[78] Under that reasoning, if 1000 persons signed a statement opposing President George W. Bush, then nearly 300 million Americans must support him! Funny how Wikipedia does not claim that."''<br />
<br />
700 out of 500,000 expressed as a percentage is 0.0014%. That is, by your figures, 99.9986% - more than the much maligned estimate gave. Can someone please tell me what the point of the '700 scientists' comment was, if it only serves to destroy your own arguments?<br />
<br />
Also, the figures are more closer to 7% religious.<br />
<br />
- http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html<br />
<br />
--[[User:Tommy|Tommy]] 21:58, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Tommy, your objection is not clear and you seem to be missing the flaw in Wikipedia's biased claim. Your point about the religious seems completely unrelated to your other point. Be clear, and I'll respond, but demonstrate that understand the flaw in Wikipedia's analysis or else I may not waste my time.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:21, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
It should be made clear what "reject evolution" means, or this debate is kind of pointless. I'm also not sure why the 'religious' comment and the link are relevant. I think the key to that objection what the first percentage, indicating that 0.0014% of scientists definitely "reject evolution". By the way, it should actually be 0.14%; 700 / 500,000 = 0.0014, but you must multiply by 100 to get the percentage. Either way, the figure is small. Aschafly is correct that assuming that ''all'' other scientists (the remaining 99.84%) "support evolution" (which doesn't mean any more than "reject evolution" does) is not necessarily valid, but as a student who knows and has spoken at length with many scientists and professors on a variety of issues, I would consider it fair to assume that ''most'' scientists have some conviction about the correctness and utility of our current theories on evolution. It is not nearly so black-and-white an issue as simply "supporting" or "rejecting" evolution. Is this covered in one of the points on this article? This probably should be changed on Wikipedia, if only because it sounds to me like this poll was conducted in improperly simplified terms. I'll look for it. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 10:06, 26 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I've looked into this reference on Wikipedia, in their [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution Level of support for evolution] article in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution#Scientific_support Scientific support] section. Due to the subtleties involved in this debate, I would still like to know more about how the poll discussed there was conducted. I did find a lively debate over the validity of using this poll in the article in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Level_of_support_for_evolution/Archive_3#Newsweek_article article's 3rd and most recent talk page archive]. There did not appear to be a consensus. If it makes any of you feel better, consider the context of this poll and remember that it was conducted in 1987 and appears to have used blunt, oversimplified questions. It's more of a historical reference than a current item now. Either way, the debate goes on. <br />
<br />
By the way, I'm curious to know if any of you can direct me to any papers published in peer-reviewed journals that presented data or explained experiments whose results clearly supported Intelligent Design. I've read about ID supporters' thought experiments and probability-based arguments, but I don't know anything about their supporting data or experimental evidence. If any of you know where I can find papers on this data and evidence, let me know. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 11:01, 26 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Obvious bias in liberal page ==<br />
Did anybody else notice that in the "See Also" section for [[Liberal]], there are a ton of links, with most of them being negative (to the point of extremity and nitpickiness such as [[Liberal celebrity obsession]] or [[Liberal Myths]]), while the same section for [[Conservative]] has only three links, none of them which are remotely negative? <br />
<br />
--[[User:Blabberno|Blabberno]] 21:13, 14 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Administrator names? Huh?==<br />
<br />
This article makes the claim that Wikipedia harbors an anti-intellectual bias because of the fact that the site has many users with "silly administrator names", uhm, excuse me, but it also makes the claim all over this page that there are far too many examples of pages being "complicated" or information about people being "buried" within lengthy articles. I don't have any problem with this page at all, and I appreciate ''what'' it's trying to say, but I have to take issue with ''how'' its said. It's irresponsible and misleading to say that the little tags accompanying edits on Wikipedia are somehow a vanguard of idiocy but then to say that Wikipedia is being deceptive because it doesn't follow (or, speaking chronologically, because it didn't ''create'') the Conservapedia model of referring to politicians in cherry-picked Fortune Cookie-size snippets according to subjective information and some stray quote. It's hardly a stretch to say that a Congressman or activist or other such notable figure being referred to as being "...a [[liberal]] [[Socialist]] [[secular]]-[[Progressivism|progressive]] who once referred to [[Christianity]] as a charade" (or some other such marginalization) would be difficult to find on Conservapedia. Basically, if this articles going to attack Wikipedia for being a flip-flopping, contradictory, biased Gemorrah, then let's please not turn around and do these EXACT same things on very page where we claim these things about them. Just a thought (as with most things here...). [[User:LinusWilson|LinusWilson]] 14:20, 26 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I concur. --[[User:StevenM|Steve]] 14:23, 26 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Replying to Linus above, there is nothing contradictory about:<br />
<br />
* criticizing anti-intellectual user names<br />
* criticizing long-winded, wordy entries filled with trivial and weak on substance<br />
<br />
: That's Wikipedia in a nutshell. It tells you everything except what you need to know, just like the National Enquirer. And Wikipedia gives that juice from the hands of anti-intellectual contributors who think it's funny to be dumb.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:33, 26 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Huh?--[[User:Faizaguo|Faizaguo]] 17:00, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Peter Singer==<br />
New to this site. Check out the article on Peter Singer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer, particularly well known for his belief in infanticide. The article makes little mention of his views, and the section purporting to include the ideas reads like an advertisement for his book. An excerpt from one of his books can be found at http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1993----.htm [[User:Egd|Egd]] 13:35, 27 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
* Quotes such as '''Simply killing an infant is never equivalent to killing a person''' were ''removed'' as being POV<br />
<br />
:Wikipedia policy: "It is inappropriate to remove blocks of well-referenced information which is germane to the subject from articles on the grounds that the information advances a point of view." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy/Precedents#Deleted_content] But this is disregarded by POV-pushers. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 11:59, 30 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Question of Logic ==<br />
<br />
The underlying grammar of this page (at least) is "wikipedia this" and "wikipedia that" as if it were a hive mind, monolithic and single-minded. While the examination of the religion templates of registered Wikipedia users ("Wikipedians", whatever) approaches laudability, the conscious choice to treat it, its articles, and its users as a single static unit rather than one made up of self-selecting communities (with particular categories of articles dominated by particular communities of users) does nothing for your credibility among those who disagree with this website or, ultimately, its political goals. Self-isolation and the creation of an "us vs. them" mentality (among other approaches of this site) just make this //look// like its users are stereotypically smug, self-righteous, hypocritical conservatives working on a "propaganda source" instead of an honestly self-critical attempt at a no-nonsense examination of the world. <br /> <br />
<br /><br />
To be clear, I am neither conservative nor liberal (my views on foreign policy tend to agree more with 'hawks', my economics more technical than political, my social/civil views classically liberal, and my historical/teleological views loosely extropian). I agree there is some degree of 'liberal' (as nebulous as that word is) bias among Wikipedia's editing communities, but I also think '''this''' community's notion of 'balance' is ridiculous. As well, I believe it is politically ineffective beyond 1) preaching to the proverbial choir and 2) reinforcing stereotypes of conservatives - how 'they' think and view others. If those are truly the goals of Conservapedians, then good luck and happy editing. [[User:Zebu1911|Zebu1911]] 23:17, 1 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Creation "myth" ==<br />
Im only going to say this from a neutral standpoint all stories of creation are myth this is the definition of myth {{unsigned|Cal05000}}<br />
<br />
: Wikipedia is redefining words to advance its [[liberal]] agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:59, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::What does wikipedia define myth as, and what is myth defined as? [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 18:02, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Wikipedia does specify that the definition of "myth" is just a traditional story with no implications of truth or un-truth. I can confirm definition this in several dictionaries. [[User:Hpesoj|Hpesoj]] 20:56, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: The word "myth" plainly connotes falsity, which is what the [[liberals]] on Wikipedia want to connote about [[creation]]. See [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myth Webster definition]. {{unsigned|Aschlafly}}<br />
<br />
::::: Aschlafly you should sign your posts. And if you read the beginning of the article you can see that the author of the article goes out of their way to define myth. The article is about creation stories, including every major religion. Not just christianity. I fail to see your problem with this. But realizing no matter what I say you will never change your opinion, or for that matter admit you were wrong. So feel free to not comment back. [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 22:07, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
You are both right. "Myth" does not imply truth or falsity ''when used in a scholarly sense''. The Merriam-Webster definition 1 (see Aschlafly's link) reflects this. But when used in an everyday sense, it implies something that is not true, as per Merriam-Webster definitions 2b and 3. Wikipedia uses the first definition as an excuse to tar creation accounts as unreliable, but contrary to your claim about "every major religion. Not just christianity", does not include atheism and apply the term to its origins account. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:40, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Great points, Philip. In sum, Wikipedia's [[liberal]] and [[atheistic]] bias is demonstrated by how it applies the term "myth" to [[creation]] but not to [[evolution]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:52, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: I completely agree that the word "myth" carries connotations of falsity, and for a while I was of the opinion that the title in question was not NPOV, but after reading the arguments on Wikipedia, there are several definitions of the word which do not define a myth as either true or false, which describe the topic in hand far more accurately than something like "story" or "belief". Here are some examples of the '''primary''' definitions from the first 4 dictionary websites I found:<br />
<br />
::*''"a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, esp. one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature."'' ([http://www.dictionary.com])<br />
::*''"an ancient story or set of stories, especially explaining in a literary way the early history of a group of people or about natural events and facts"'' ([http://dictionary.cambridge.org])<br />
::*''"a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon"'' ([http://www.merriam-webster.com])<br />
::*''"ancient story: a traditional story about heroes or supernatural beings, often attempting to explain the origins of natural phenomena or aspects of human behavior"'' ([http://encarta.msn.com])<br />
<br />
::In my opinion, the definition of the word "myth" is perfectly inline with the definition of Creationism, while it doesn't describe recent scientific theories like the Big Bang and the theory of evolution. The fact that the article clearly explains that it is using the strictly academic definition of the word makes it an acceptable title, and I don't think a more vague, politically correct word is needed. [[User:Hpesoj|Hpesoj]] 22:58, 8 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: [[Wikipedia]] is a good home for you then. You selectively quote from the dictionary definitions about myth and then, once you settle on a misleading meaning, you apply it in a biased way against creation but not evolution. You've illustrated and embraced the bias at Wikipedia well. Enjoy it there. We don't allow such bias here on our content pages.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:04, 8 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::I did not selectively quote dictionary definitions, I clearly stated that I chose the '''primary''' definitions from the first 4 (and, in fact, only) dictionary websites that I looked at (typed "dictionary" into google and chose from the first page of results). I acknowledged that "myth" carries negative connotations, and that at first I felt that the title did need to be changed. However, I felt after consideration, that due to word (or at least the primary definition of the word) being far more descriptive of the topic at hand than other potential replacements, along with the definition of the word within the article itself, it was better to keep the title than to change it because of the connotations it carries. This is of course my opinion, and is based on my view of how negative the word "myth" is. Others are likely to have different perceptions, and thus disagree with me.<br />
<br />
::::The other main definition of "myth" seems to be ''"false belief: a widely held but mistaken belief"'' (encarta). Both Evolution and Creationism could fall under this description, depending on your POV/bias. Evolution however, in my opinion, does not fall under the other definition, as it is in no way "traditional", "supernatural", "historical" or has anything to do with "deities", whereas Creationism does (if you disagree I would be happy to hear your points).<br />
<br />
::::I do not support any form of bias in this context, and agree with Conservapedia that there is significant bias throughout Wikipedia that needs to be amended. I hope that I have cleared up my views on the matter. [[User:Hpesoj|Hpesoj]] 00:19, 9 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::: Evolution wasn't invented by Darwin. He merely popularised it by giving it a pseudo-scientific explanation. The general idea of evolution is ancient, so it ''does'' fit some of the definitions you provided (note that reference to a deity was not in all definitions, and not a requirement in others). [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:43, 9 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Wikipedia obviously cant say it isnt a myth either so how you put it?<br />
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 23:54, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Philip you make a good point, but you have one flaw in your logic. The purpose of an encyclopedia is the present factual information based on the official definitions. Yes, popular and actual definitions are often at odds, but encylopedias present the actual definition. I disagree that a evolutionist/atheistic view of creation should be added. The page is about religious creation myths, and it does include a link to the article on evolution. [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 13:54, 6 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
: I'm not aware that anyone has decreed that encyclopedias can only use "official" definitions.<br />
: If the page is about ''religious'' creation myths, then why exclude the "creation myth" of atheistic religions? This is part of the atheist agenda: Label everyone else's worldviews/beliefs as "religious", but their own as "non-religious" or "rational" or whatever, and label everyone else's beliefs about origins as "creation myths" but their own as "scientific". Such artificial self-serving distinctions are not accepted on Conservapedia. Granted, Wikipedia does define how it is using the term "myth" in that particular article, but, as pointed out, does not include the atheistic origins myth. Further, at the top of the page are links to "scientific" views, a non-so-subtle inference that the "creation myths" are not scientific.<br />
: And the only link to evolution ''per se'' is buried within the "Hermeticism" section half way through the page.<br />
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:02, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
While that may be so Philip I think it prudent to mention that many links on this website either redirect to another conservapedia page, are missing altogether or are linked to a page that says nothing in regards to the intended point.<br />
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 06:15, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
: I'm sorry, but I have no idea how that relates to the discussion. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:11, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Well, you said the only link to evolution in wikipedia when discussing the 'creation myth' was buried ''per se'' (in what I gather) rather obscurely. I was pointing out that many CP links demonstrate this also, if not worse.<br />
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 08:23, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
: My ''criticism'' was that Wikipedia treats creation but not evolution as a "myth". My reference to an evolution link was simply a reply to your claim that the Wikipedia article did link to evolution. It does, but not in any way that could be construed as including evolution as a "creation myth". [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:50, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Has anyone else noticed the further evidence of systemic bias in the Wikipedia Creation myth page? "Some Jews and Christians believe that in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Every other subsection starts without such a qualifier:<br />
* "The Aztec narrative describing creation proceeds with..."<br />
* "In the beginning, there was just water..." (Cherokee)<br />
* "The god Izanagi and goddess Izanami churned the ocean..." (Shinto)<br />
* "The Voluspa opens with the Norse account of the creation of the present universe :"<br />
Wikipedia insists on qualifying every statement regarding Christianity to suggest that those who believe in the Bible, or in this case that Genesis is the Christian story of creation, are offshoots of the mainstream. [[User:Egd|Egd]] 10:31, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Right. The hostility and bias on Wikipedia against Christianity are undeniable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:33, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
: Yes, I've seen that sort of thing before, although probably not that particular example. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 12:22, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Also wikipedia has a categories for alleged Christian mythology and Jewish mythology --<span style="margin-top: -3px;">&nbsp;[[Image:50 star flag.png|12px]]</span><span style="position:relative; overflow:hidden; width:88px; height:15px; z-index:2;"> [[User:Deborah|Deborah]] [[Special:Contributions/Deborah|<font color="gray">(contributions)</font>]] [[User_talk:Deborah|<font color="darkslategray">(talk)</font>]]</span> 12:23, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I just removed a 'bias' example regarding the Wikipedia article "Creation myth" because it talks about myths from all sorts of religions and cultures. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 15:17, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Categorization ==<br />
<br />
Would anyone object to an effort to categorize the examples in different sections, such as Wikipedia attacks on religion, Wikipedia pro-liberal bias, examples that have been corrected and so on? [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 22:26, 14 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: That's OK, provided it does not dilute the entry or introduce [[placement bias]] by moving stronger and more recent points lower in the page.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:54, 14 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== #12: Ron Paul smear ==<br />
<br />
As a huge Ron Paul supporter, #12 sent me to straight to wikipedia in hopes of setting things straight, only to find that the article clearly shows that the comments were not made by Ron Paul. I fail to see the smear here. -[[User:Crimson30|Crimson30]] 14:33, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Why is the smear so extensive on Ron Paul's entry given that, as you say, he did not author the comments? When the entry is about a [[liberal]], Wikipedia does not smear the person in such a manner. Hence this illustrates Wikipedia's bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:04, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: How is the entry in the Wikipedia article a smear? It's responsible of the article to mention the controversy over the newsletters given the widespread coverage it has in anti-Paul propaganda online, and the article clearly states that Ron Paul is not the source of those comments and that they are not his beliefs. If there was a Wikipedia article about you, and there was a widespread story on the internet that falsely attributed Holocaust denial remarks to you, would you think Wikipedia worse for noting this story and refuting it? [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 15:42, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Wikipedia is like the National Enquirer, then, in simply repeating smears about people without any educational value.<br />
<br />
::: But the reason the point is here, as I said, is because Wikipedia does NOT smear liberals as it smears conservatives.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:07, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: But it *does* have educational value - it informs people that Ron Paul did not write those things, does not believe those things and that he finds what was written morally reprehensible. It's not a smear, because it presents the facts of the matter. And if it's not a smear, the point has to be made with a different article. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 17:28, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::: "Wandering", it obviously is a smear. If you can't admit that, then this discussion is a waste of time. Ron Paul's opponents used that information to attack and smear him. Enough said.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:15, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: They cannot use that information to smear him, because the information directly indicates that it is not smear-worthy material. The information clearly shows that Ron Paul did not write and in fact repudiates the controversial content from the newsletters. I'm beginning to wonder if you've actually read that portion of the article word-for-word, instead of just skimming it. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 18:52, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Points #1, #4 == <br />
<br />
I do not see how the image of the minuteman statue is presented as "proof" (although the caption is admittedly quite poor). On the point of the two articles concerning religious terrorism, "body" seems somewhat of a misnomer, since the articles are not essays. Regardless, reference link 6 is broken. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 22:03, 23 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Defamatory material in American Family Association article ==<br />
<br />
Wikipedia's article for the group includes numerous defamatory assertions which are either unsupported or poorly supported (e.g. with biased references). For example, the article claims the AFA supports "the criminalization of homosexuality," yet neither source supports such a blanket assertion (one of the sources actually says the AFA supports criminalizing ''public displays'' of homosexuality). Another example, the article states, "The March 2005 issue of the AFA's Journal contained an article which insinuated that raising children as Jews would lead to criminal lifestyles, and that it required a conversion to Christianity in order to make them productive members of society," yet the article in question makes absolutely no such insinuation. Wikipedia also categorizes the article under "Homophobia" even though phobias are disorders requiring a clinical diagnosis to identify. Attempts to correct material within the article are met with vicious and unrelenting opposition by homosexual and pro-homosexual editors. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 20:03, 30 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Check out the recent edit history. WP editor (who is gay, unsurprisingly enough) is reverting my properly rationalized edits for no good reason. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 21:12, 30 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: The Wikipedia entry does misrepresent what the [[American Family Association]] article says, probably in a misguided attempt to smear the [[American Family Association]]. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Family_Association&diff=216091906&oldid=216091846] Let's see how long Wikipedia persists in its misrepresentation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:36, 30 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::I have to admit that there was a show of bias on the part of WP editors, or to be more precise two of them. If you follow guidelines like I did and initiate discussion rather than just engaging in all out edit wars you will find that the greater community is more than willing to listen. Try doing that next time, the talk page is there for a reason. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 20:59, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: I don't see any improvement. Illustrating its bias, [[Wikipedia]] simply reverted or overwrote the corrections in order to continue to smear the [[American Family Association]]. The [[Wikipedia]] entry even resorts to smearing the [[American Family Association]] for something it did not even write in one of the widely read textbooks of all time. Contrast that with how [[Wikipedia]] does not criticize John Scopes and the [[ACLU]] for defending the [[racist]] textbook at issue in the [[Scopes trial]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:57, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Look closer, if you have any problems with the current article perhaps you could list them here and we could see if we can try to fix them. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 23:07, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: It's essentially the same as when I (and Jinxmchue) complained. The Wikipedia entry is a complete hatchet job. No, I'm not going to waste all night on this. The [[anti-conservatives]] running [[Wikipedia]] will revert any corrections to this entry. This is a determined smear by Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:12, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Well the thing is Jinx didn't complain, he engaged in an edit war. Just list a couple of things here and we'll see if we can't get them changed. If they aren't then that's that, if they are then we can start working on other problems with the article. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 23:19, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Edit war. Mm-hmm. Yeah, no one else there was involved in any edit war. Nope. They can revert edits they don't like without any sort of attempt to address issues, get their friends involved to subvert the three revert rule, but they aren't ever accused of starting edit wars. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 23:29, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I didn't say the others weren't also involved in an edit war, obviously you would need two sides to do it. However, if you observe what I did (discussed, rather than continually revert and get blocked for it) you will see that I achieved my goal (as stated on the article's talk page). Now, give me something else wrong with the article and we will see if we can change it. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 23:31, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::If you want to see what I did, check the edit history for AFA's article over there. There's absolutely no legitimate reason for my edits being reverted. There's just a couple of AFA-hating gay editors who want the article to be a hit piece. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 23:32, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<- Yes there were a couple of anti-AFA editors who chose to revert the article, and if you look closely they also got blocked for it (one has since left). If you did what I did and tried to initiate discussion on the article's talk page you would not have gotten blocked, and others would have come to your assistance, as they came to mine. The AFA article has also been reported to ANI/NPOV for further assessment of bias against the organisation. Now, if you or Andy would care to give me another problem with the article then we will see if we can get that changed too. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 23:36, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: We did. See the first and fifth paragraphs above. Those smears are still in the Wikipedia entry about the [[American Family Association]] despite the high-level review that you apparently initiated, and despite Wikipedia not smearing liberals like that. If AFA supported the [[homosexual agenda]] rather than opposing it, then you can be sure that Wikipedia would have a very different and favorable entry about it. So, the bottom line is clear: this is yet another example of bias at Wikipedia, and it's not likely to change.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:28, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:I am making some corrections now. We will see if the one remaining gay editor who wants to control the page will leave them be. I doubt it, but then years of experience with such people have turned me into a cynic. Perhaps I will be pleasantly surprised. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 22:31, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::My cynicism was well-founded. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 11:20, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Point #44 re: Association of American Physicians and Surgeons ==<br />
<br />
The reader who submitted this comment claims that it was "guilt by association" to repeat "a 40 year old newspaper claim that some of its leaders once belonged to the JBS." <br />
<br />
However, the factual basis for associating AAPS with the John Birch Society is much stronger than a mere "newspaper claim". For example: in the early 1960's, the AAPS Board of Directors included Dr. Granville Knight (a JBS National Council member), Dr. Charles W. Pavey (a JBS member),Dr. James L. Doenges (a JBS endorser) and Dr. George J. Hess (a JBS member who was AAPS President in 1962). <br />
<br />
Furthermore, AAPS annual conventions featured speakers and exhibitors which were recommended by the the JBS in its own literature. In fact, the exhibitors often were organizations that were created or led by JBS members, endorsers and sympathizers -- including, for example, Southern States Industrial Council, National Education Program, National Committee For Economic Freedom, and American Opinion magazine (the JBS magazine!). AAPS described these organizations as "freedom organizations". Speakers at AAPS conventions included prominent JBS members and sympathizers such as JBS National Council member Revilo P. Oliver.<br />
<br />
Incidentally, senior FBI officials (including Director J. Edgar Hoover, FBI Division Chiefs, and Supervisors within its Domestic Intelligence Division) routinely referred to the JBS in FBI memos as "irrational", "extremist",<br />
"irresponsible", "fanatics", and "lunatic fringe". They did not describe the JBS as a "freedom organization".{{unsigned|Ernie1241}}<br />
<br />
: Your 40-year-old [[gossip]] is silly and unsupported. Communists, anarchists, criminals, etc., also belong to numerous organizations. Smearing through use of guilt-by-association is criticized by [[liberals]] and against official Wikipedia policy. So why this reliance on 40-year-old gossip against this organization? This selective smearing illustrates Wikipedia's bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:23, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: : REPLY TO ASCHLAFLY: Not sure why you describe what I presented as "gossip". The details concerning JBS member connections to AAPS come from AAPS publications. Is that "gossip"? The info I provided regarding comments made by top FBI officials originate in FBI internal memos---all of which I have in my possession. Is that "gossip"? You can certainly disagree with their judgments -- but why misrepresent and de-value the quality of the data as nothing more than "gossip"? {{unsigned|Ernie1241}}<br />
<br />
::: You lack dates, sources or logic for your gossipy accusations. The accusations have no relevance today. Do you spread the same silly gossip about the Democratic Party, such as claiming that many KKK members were delegates at Democratic Party conventions a hundred years ago? No, Wikipedia only uses this silly smear campaign against conservative organizations. That's called bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:15, 24 July 2008 (EDT) <br />
<br />
With respect to your larger point (i.e. unsavory people belong to all sorts of organizations) -- yes, that's true but you conveniently ignore the salient difference i.e. such individuals did not represent the official position of those organizations nor were they knowingly embraced by such organizations. In fact, if "Communists, anarchists, criminals, etc." were identified -- most organizations would expel them. BY CONTRAST, AAPS enthusiastically welcomed JBS members and even invited them to be speakers and exhibitors at AAPS functions!<br />
:JBS itself doesn't deny that it's hired AAPS members. Examples include Nathaniel Adamson, Ray Clark, and Arthur Crino. [http://www.jbs.org/index.php/about/john-birch-society-national-council].--[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 22:40, 28 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Reversion explained ==<br />
<br />
The recent edits by [[User:Dnotice]] had an egregiously misspelled word, several inappropriate edits, and did not recognize that some Wikipedia improvements were after (and probably the result of) criticisms here. Some of the edits reverted had some value if presented properly. We welcome proper update of the points edited.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:12, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:"Egregiously misspelled"? "Inappropriate edits"? Which are you referring to? [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 14:29, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: Dnotice, you have this backwards. Please fix your own misspelling, and don't make as many potentially objectionable edits without discussing them here. OK?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:33, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::The whole idea of a Wikipedia-style website is that if a mistake is noticed, e.g. spelling, then the next user amends that error, instead of removing all of the previous user's edits on that page. Anyway, you didn't answer my question, which parts of my edits are are you specifically referring to? If I know which are incorrect or "potentially objectionable" on this site, I can ensure that future edits don't fall into that category. [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 14:46, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::As you've made amendments to my further edits, any chance of a response to my questions? [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 05:49, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Dnotice, you have to try harder first. Sorry, I wish I had the time to correct your mistakes, but I don't. In addition to an egregious misspelling, your edit to the point about Conservapedia being supportive of YEC was improper as it does not properly reference the prior version of the Wikipedia entry that illustrated the bias, and does not note how Wikipedia changed its entry in response to criticism here. Unless you fix your edit yourself, I will probably revert it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:09, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Is Conservapedia supportive of YEC? [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 08:12, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: StatsMan, please read the relevant points in the entry first before asking questions that distract from the issue at hand, and then stick to the issue of how Wikipedia falsely portrayed Conservapedia in order to try to smear it in front of the Wikipedia audience.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:18, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::You didn't answer his question. [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 07:54, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::My edit took a direct quote from the link that was already in place. Anyway, it's odd that you've now decided to keep in my effective re-instatement of your deletion of this point... [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 11:38, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: No, I'm hoping you'll fix your edit to reflect how Wikipedia changed its entry in response to criticism here. Will you?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:04, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::How could I show that? Especially when you don't deny what I said about my edit reflecting the what the quote actually said. With all respect, the previous edit was guilty of [[Quote mining|quote-mining]] as the Wikipedia article (even at that particular time) had a lot more than what this site portrayed it did. [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 07:54, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Criticism of Conservapedia "rare or non-existent"==<br />
Your suggestion that criticism of Conseravpedia "are rare or non-existent" seems blind to the day-to-day reality of Conservapedia. Criticism of your articles here features loudly on many, many Talk pages, much of it vandalism, yes, but much of it also well founded, well reasoned and intelligent criticism. And this is not just criticism based on ideology - this is often criticism of factual inaccuracy and misleading information. I think it's only fair to point this out in the interest of Fair Balance. [[User:StatsFan|StatsFan]] 22:29, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: You misunderstood what your quote refers to, and falsely stated that the quote applies to all criticism. Of course many people who do not like the truth are going to criticize the truth, but that is not what the quote refers to.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:07, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: Correct me if I'm confused, but were you not referring to the sentence in the WP article which states "The site has come upon much criticism from those who have accused it of factual inaccuracies and bias"? [[User:StatsFan|StatsFan]] 11:10, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Right, but there are few or no criticisms of Conservapedia for "factual inaccuracies." The citation by Wikipedia for its claim is to a New York Times article that actually criticizes Wikipedia for harping on such a claim.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:02, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Belfast Agreement==<br />
Although both 'Belfast Agreement' and 'Good Friday Agreement' are used almost interchangeably, it has become common for Irish and UK people to refer to this agreement as 'Belfast Agreement'. Some references from major Irish news sources are listed here - [http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0527/breaking59.html], [http://www.rte.ie/news/1999/0408/north.html], [http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/dissecting-north-agreement--for-all-its-worth-363083.html]. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 19:27, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:But it is better known as "Good Friday Agreement" elsewhere. [[User:WilliamH|WilliamH]] 19:28, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::I am British and would say that use of 'the Good Friday Agreement' is far more common, in Great Britain at any rate. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 19:30, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::Where is the 'elsewhere' you refer to WilliamH? Even the Northern Ireland Office refers to it as both [http://www.nio.gov.uk/the-agreement]. I am Irish and would say 'Belfast Agreement' is much more commonly used on our island. I'm mostly curious to know why Wikipedia's use of one term over the other is considered 'bias' here? It reeks of grasping at straws, as it's perfectly appropriate to use either term. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 19:47, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::'Elsewhere' as in everywhere else outside Ireland or the UK. (I might have forgotten a few places or two, but the point stands.) [[User:WilliamH|WilliamH]] 20:12, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::::Well, I've removed the reference from the article, because while facts usually contain a 'liberal bias', I don't believe they're geographically biased. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 21:25, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::: Google shows that uses of "Good Friday Agreement" outnumber "Belfast Agreement" '''by more than a 3:1 ratio.''' It's irrelevant that Ireland newspapers prefer "Belfast Agreement" because Wikipedia does not ordinarily defer to an Irish point-of-view!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:52, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::: The popularity of a term "on Google" is simply not a metric on which to base an encyclopedia - if you go down the road of determining 'fact' based on Google cites, you're in deep trouble. The simple fact is, to those for whom the Agreement matters, both terms are interchangeable, and in fact Belfast Agreement is probably more commonly used. Finally, to use the choice of one term over the other as implying 'bias in Wikipeida' is to invent controversy where there is none, and in itself, biased - in this case, against Wikipedia, the editors of which can fairly choose to use whichever term they want. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 23:20, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::: An illustration of bias is how decisions that could go one way or the other (i.e., "interchangeable) are, in fact, always decided one way. In Wikipedia's case, that bias is against religion. Wikipedia censors religious references every time it can, and insisting on the unfamiliar "Belfast Agreement" rather that the more popular "Good Friday Agreement" is merely one of many examples. Alone it may not be significant, but with numerous other examples it reinforces the existence of the bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:38, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::: You are guilty of trying to foist a conspiracy theory into on an 'encyclopedia' article. Have you considered that those who would be most knowledgeable about the Belfast Agreement might, in fact, be from Ireland? And that therefore the Wikipedia articles may well be written by Irish editors? And that they may simply be using the term that is most familiar to them? And that the choice to not use the term containing a religious holiday reflects no "conspiracy against religion" as you have invented? Not everyone in the world is American, you know - in fact, Americans barely make up 5% of the world's population. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 23:46, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::::::::: Maybe there are more non-Americans in the world than Americans, but there definitely are more Americans in Wikipedia than Irishmen (plus, all the other english-speaking nationalities that don't call it 'Belfast Agreement') so bias is the most plausible explanation. [[User:WilliamH|WilliamH]] 23:50, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::::::::::: I take it you are certain that the proportion of Irish editors on the Wikipedia article is no higher than on, for example, an article about Alabama? [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 00:00, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::::::::: Some protestant groups in Northern Ireland do not celebrate Good Friday, preferring to observe the crucifixion on Wednesday, so the neutral term 'Belfast Agreement' gained favour in diplomatic circles in order to avoid suggestions of anti-protestant bias. [[User:Jalapeno|Jalapeno]] 23:52, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::::::::::: Exactly, Jalapeno. Thank you for pointing out the political sensitivities that those of us on this island take for granted, and foreigners are clueless about. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 23:58, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::: Walter, you protest far too much, and now you have the fringe below even siding with you. Wikipedia editors are predominantly American and British, far more than Irish. <br />
<br />
:::::::::::::: By more than a 3:1 margin the term "Good Friday Agreement" is used by the public. The fact that some Irish newspapers, which are themselves more liberal than the Irish public, use the term "Belfast Agreement" is an awfully weak rationale. There is no sign that the decision at Wikipedia was made by Irishmen. Odds are that this decision was made by the typically liberal editors there who seek to censor Christian. Many other points in [[Bias in Wikipedia]] illustrate the same bias at Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:54, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::::::::::::WP's bias is shown by it using the document's official name? (See WaltherPPK's link to the Northern Ireland Office) [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 19:03, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::::: ASchlafly, I protest because I know I am right and that you are wrong. First, I note you continue to assert the Google-sourced 3:1 ratio - except you now claim it's "the public". If Google is equal to "the public", I'll be damned. Please don't try and pull the wool over people's eyes - the world exists beyond the confines of Google, you know. Secondly, you clearly know ''nothing'' about the Irish media landscape (and, in fairness, I wouldn't expect you to), and you obviously haven't read any of my supporting references. Two are from newspapers - one being slightly left-of-centre (Irish Times), and one being right-of-centre (Independent). The third reference was a TV channel. They represent the non-tabloid news sources in the country. The other non-tabloid newspaper is to the right of these, and is only published on Sundays. Given your lack of knowledge of the Irish media scene, how you "know" that Irish newspapers are more liberal than the Irish public, I'd be interested to know. Are you an expert on every country in the world? Finally, you have obviously not looked at the Northern Ireland Office (of the UK Government) document on the Agreement (which I referenced above), which states "The Agreement (also known as the Good Friday Agreement or Belfast Agreement) was reached in Belfast on Friday, April 10 1998". Re-read Jalapeno's comments above as to the reason WHY politicans and public figures in Ireland PREFER the term 'Belfast Agreement to Good Friday Agreement. While your ignorance of the world may be appealing to an uneducated Amero-centric reader base, rest assured those of us from other nations will not lie down and let YOU tell US how we name our institutions, offices, or policy. Good day to you Sir. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 19:19, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::::: Walter, your ranting is getting out of control. I do know quite a bit about the Irish press, Ireland, and Wikipedia. In fact, I've been quoted in the past in the Irish newspapers. Yes, they are more liberal than the Irish public, and Irishmen have relatively little influence at Wikipedia. The British and American influence, by liberals, is far stronger. It's absurd, frankly, for you to claim that the naming of the Agreement is due to the position of the Irish press.<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::::: Want to rely on the Northern Ireland Office? Fine. It provides the "Good Friday Agreement" as the first choice, even though alphabetically it would come second. Use it and please stop pretending that the atheists at Wikipedia lack bias. Read the scores of other examples of the same [[Bias in Wikipedia]] and end your [[liberal denial]]. Godspeed. I expect you will insist on [[last wordism]] now.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:40, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::::::: ASchlafly, Where did I claim "that the naming of the Agreement is due to the position of the Irish press"? We're trying to make you understand the sensitivities of Northern Irish politics - re-read Japaleno's comment above please as to why "Belfast Agreement" is actually the '''preferred''' term - you should be especially sensitive to the fact that the reason it's ''not'' named "Good Friday Agreement" is '''for''' religious reasons. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 20:03, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===References===<br />
Here's [http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/index.asp?locID=361&docID=219&COMMAND=PRINTER the document itself], which shows that ''technically'', its title is '''The Northern Ireland Peace Agreement'''. (''All other names are therefore colloquial terms''). Here are some references from official Irish government websites showing many different terms used for the Agreement: [http://www.equality.ie/index.asp?locID=135&docID=507], [http://www.citizensinformation.ie/References/legislative/legislative-background-to-irish-citizenship], [http://ombudsman.gov.ie/en/Legislation/TheOmbudsmanAct1980/], [http://www.president.ie/index.php?section=5&speech=176&lang=eng], or [http://www.ga.etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAY102655 this one, wherein it is referred to as "The Belfast Agreement of Good Friday"]. A brief scan of any of these will show you that any term is equally usable, and that 'Good Friday Agreement' is simply one of them. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 20:50, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Could someone move [[Camp David Accords]] to [[Constitution Day Agreement]] or [[Saint Lambert Agreement]]? It just happens that September 17th (the day the accord was signed) is a a political holiday in North America and it should be named accordingly. Alternatively, September 17th is also the feast of Saint Lambert and it is disappointing that people are not recognizing the religious significance of the date and instead using the more widely known, secular, place name. --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 18:12, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Does this mean that CP has an anti-Christian and/or anti-American bias? [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 18:32, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
----<br />
Google may not be the same as the public, but it's likely to be fairly close, and is about the best idea of public usage that we have readily available. So Andy's correct point that the term "Good Friday Agreement" is more common that "Belfast Agreement" holds up, pending better evidence to the contrary.<br />
<br />
However, I don't think it's a good entry to have in the list, unless we have some evidence of Wikipedia using the Belfast name for (anti-)religious reasons. That may be a plausible explanation (Wikipedia does tend to be anti-Christian), but in this case using the Good Friday name hardly advances Christianity at all, so Wikipedia would have little motive to change it on that basis. So although the argument ''may'' be correct, it would be better to not use this example and stick with just having stronger examples.<br />
<br />
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:28, 4 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Philip, a few points. 1) The specific words written by ASchlafly which I objected to and removed from the article described the term "Belfast Agreement" as "ambiguous and unfamiliar", not 'less popular'. The copious evidence I have provided has shown that the term is neither officially nor colloquially considered "ambiguous and unfamiliar", but is in regular, everyday use in the community where it is most often discussed by both of the Governments concerned and amongst the press and general public; 2) Not only that, but others have explained that there is actually an underlying reason why, for obvious reasons of religious sensitivity to all communities, religious terms are generally ''avoided'' in political debate in Northern Ireland; 3) It seems Mr.Schlafly's Amero-centric view of the world and his ignorance of Irish affairs led him to presume guilt on behalf of the Wikipedia editors where there was none; 4) Finally, I note that the Wikipedia article on the Agreement '''very clearly''' lists the term 'Good Friday Agreement' as "alternatively and widely known" in the opening sentence of their article, and the term Good Friday Agreement redirects to the article as one would expect [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belfast_Agreement]. In short, not only was the assumption wrong, the facts were wrong, and the case didn't even exist. I notice you too are sometimes upset when foreigners presume to know about Antipodean affairs, so I thank you for your analysis of this mistaken example. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 12:09, 4 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:: 1) I agree. I was responding to comments on this page, not to the wording in the article.<br />
:: 2) This seems to be supporting that Wikipedia's choice of label ''was'' chosen for religious reasons.<br />
:: 3) I can't see what US-centricity has to do with this particular case.<br />
:: 4) I can't see that this is any sort of rebuttal. The fact is that Wikipedia has chosen to not use (as the article title) the official name of the agreement, but what appears to be the lesser-used of the two most-commonly-used unofficial titles. And by the way, I Googled the two unofficial names on all English-language pages, on .au pages, and on .uk pages, and in all three cases, the Good Friday name was the most popular by a significant margin. So it's not as though one is more popular in American and the other in Britain, for example. So although it's unknown why Wikipedia has gone for the lesser-used title, I don't think that it's safe to jump to the conclusion that it's for anti-Christian reasons, although neither should that reason be ruled out.<br />
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:56, 4 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Walther, Wikipedia has chosen the less popular, but more secular, name. As Philip observes, you now seem to be saying that Wikipedia did do this for religious reasons after all. Maybe what is needed is for Wikipedia to explain its decision. Perhaps the edit history can be checked, and the person responsible can be asked. I'm confident that Irish newspapers had nothing to do with the decision. <br />
<br />
::: There may even be a formal Wikipedia policy favoring secular names rather than religious ones. Guess what? I just typed in "Saint Valentine's Day," and Wikipedia redirects me to the secular form, "Valentine's Day." I could repeat that exercise with other examples and I'm confident the same pro-secular result would be obtained.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:24, 4 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: The edit history shows that the Wikipedia article was started in 2001 as 'Belfast Agreement'. There was a proposal to move the article to 'Good Friday Agreement' in 2005 that failed due to lack of consensus. There is a long and ignoble history of naming disputes in Northern Ireland (e.g. [[Londonderry#Nomenclature]]) and those of us who are familiar with this part of the world know will appreciate that if there is a workable neutral term available then it's almost always best to stick to that rather than risk stirring up sectarian passions. Of course Conservapedia, as an explicitly pro-US site, is free to ignore political subtleties in other parts of the world. Interestingly Conservapedia has ''separate'' articles on [[Belfast Agreement]] and [[Good Friday Agreement]] -- what should we make of that! [[User:Jalapeno|Jalapeno]] 01:10, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::: Oh no, we have entries for each! :-) Thanks for pointing that out. What do you suggest we do about it?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:32, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I'm not really part of this argument, but I suggest they be merged, under whatever name you prefer, with the other redirecting to it. -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 09:34, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::: Given the far greater usage, familiarity and descriptiveness of the term "Good Friday Agreement," I think that is the obvious choice. Wouldn't you agree?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:41, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::: I'm not sure that "Good Friday Agreement" is more descriptive, but I agree that it appears to be more common. However, rather than take sides on this, why not go with the ''official'' title given above (assuming that's correct; I haven't checked it): "The Northern Ireland Peace Agreement". Both the other terms can be redirects to that. I'm not suggesting this solely to avoid taking sides (I'm happy to take sides where it's warranted), but when there is an official title and two unofficial titles, why not go with the official title? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:48, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::: Your suggestion is a good one, assuming that really is the official name. Let's see what others have to say here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:53, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::: Please create the new article as Philip suggested. It is really the only ''correct'' way to title the article, and you can finally claim to have an article that is ''more correctly named'' than Wikipedia. It is the official name for the Agreement, as evidenced by [http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/Pdf%20files/NIPeaceAgreement.pdf this, the official Irish Government PDF version] of the document. All other names are colloquial terms and may be redirects to it. Thank you for finally understanding my position. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 11:10, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::: OK, but do you agree that "Saint Valentine's Day" is the correct name for that entry and that Wikipedia is biased in claiming otherwise?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:13, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::: Google shows that uses of "Valentine's Day" outnumber "Saint Valentine's Day" by '''more than a 235:1 ratio''', so I think the answer is obviously not, no. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 11:45, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::: I feel like Charlie Brown after Lucy invited him to kick the football, but then pulled the ball away at the last minute (using incorrect data as well - try "St. Valentine's Day" too). Walther, you just refused to apply your reasoning to an analogous situation, and instead insisted on censoring the religious name a second time. To say your approach just lost credibility would be an understatement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:24, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::: ASchlafly, I am using the methodology you recommended [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia&diff=next&oldid=465265 in your comment above] - using Google hits to determine 'truth'. As to spellings and typos, it makes little difference - "St.Valentine's Day"=563,000 hits and "Saint Valentine's Day"=176,000, a total of 739,000 hits. "Valentine's Day"=41,500,000 hits, and "Valentines Day"=19,600,000 hits, or a total of 61 million hits, giving a ratio of 82:1 in favour of the non-religious form. Thus, by your suggested methodology as above, all articles regarding the 14th Feb should be retitled "Valentine's Day", and the religious forms should be redirects. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 13:15, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::: But you already emphatically rejected that methodology and, besides, "St. Valentine's Day" is unquestionably the historically correct name. "Belfast Agreement" has no historical claim to accuracy. While I was willing to compromise, you were not: you are adamant that the non-religious name be chosen in both circumstances, for contradictory reasons.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:34, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::::::::::::::So let me get this right: Your methodology is using Google rankings and hits to decide whether or not to use a certain name for an article on Conservapedia. First of all, you have a go at [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] for not using your methodology and then, after using it and displaying the results, you criticize him even more for doing so? Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't... [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 14:50, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::: Rather than creating a new article, one of the existing articles should be renamed. Probably the Good Friday Agreement one, given that it was started first. Of course only a sysop can do that, but there's enough of us around. Are we agreed on that course of action? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:22, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Wikipedia "bias" ==<br />
<br />
When Wikipedia says that "Obama entered Harvard Law School in fall 1988 and at the end of his first year was selected as an editor of the law review based on his grades and a writing competition", it's because it's [http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/?page=full sourced.] The fact that [[User:ASchlafly|you]] disagree doesn't constitute bias.{{unsigned|Tennant}}<br />
<br />
: Surely you don't suggest that merely citing a (liberal) source makes something true and unbiased.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:13, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:I think the Wikipedia sourcing is somewhat poor, but until there's evidence that he was chosen due to the quota, this "example of bias" should definitely be removed. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 14:15, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Ah yes, because no non-anglo-saxon person ever has good grades. That sounds a lot like racism on Mr. Schlafly's part. [[User:SugarCup|SugarCup]] 15:37, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::To my knowledge, the policy at Wikipedia is that everything must be correctly sourced - i.e., it's enough if the source is reputable, and the entry is relevant. It doesn't matter if the source is liberal, conservative, anarchist, fascist, monarchist, socialist, regionalist, communist, christian, buddhist, atheist, nationalist, chauvinist, et cetera. Thank you. --[[User:Tennant|Tennant]] 17:53, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::Aschlafly, the problem with your entry is that if you follow that pattern, then you should insert each and every liberal quote on Wikipedia, from ''every'' article. '''--[[User:Tennant|Tennant]] 18:28, 17 June 2008 (EDT)'''<br />
<br />
:::More to the point there is nothing in the reference we supply here to indicate that Obama was selected on the basis of his race. Does Conservapedia want to have a ''lower'' standard of fact checking than Wikipedia? [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 13:48, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Isn't this article biased as well?==<br />
Sorry-I'm new-but isn't this article biased by saying that Wikipedia is biased? This is sort of like a personal account, depending on personal judgement. And plus this sounds like publically directing a criticism against Wikiepdia. PLus I think some of the stuff has already been changed or reverted--[[User:Faizaguo|Faizaguo]] 17:04, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:How does claiming that something is biased constitute bias? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:14, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Wikipedia includes phony quote for over three years ==<br />
<br />
The phony quote in question is as follows:<br />
<blockquote><br />
The objective [of the Wedge Strategy] is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to 'the truth' of the Bible and then 'the question of sin' and finally 'introduced to Jesus.'<br />
</blockquote><br />
This appeared on at least three pages. Here is how the pages appeared recently before I attempted to remove the quote:<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phillip_E._Johnson&oldid=219686529#Criticisms Phillip E. Johnson]<br /><br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teach_the_Controversy&oldid=219162996#The_Discovery_Institute Teach the Controversy]<br /><br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedge_strategy&oldid=215173365#Origins_of_the_movement_and_strategy Wedge strategy]<br />
<br />
And here's where the quote was added for each page:<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phillip_E._Johnson&diff=prev&oldid=12617922 Phillip E. Johnson - April 21, 2005]<br /><br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teach_the_Controversy&diff=prev&oldid=12219123 Teach the Controversy - April 12, 2005]<br /><br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedge_strategy&diff=prev&oldid=15250578 Wedge strategy - June 15, 2005]<br />
<br />
There's absolutely no indication that this is anything other than a direct quote. I found that the quote was completely bogus [http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/02/post-4.html here] and [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Phillip_E._Johnson here]. According to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blp#Remove_unsourced_or_poorly_sourced_contentious_material Wikipedia's Biographies of Living Persons] policy, such false material should be removed immediately and without discussion.<br />
<br />
This removal didn't sit well with the anti-ID crowd, however, and I came under vicious assault, particularly from one editor. I ultimately prevailed, and though the quote was not removed, it was moved and clarified as being a paraphrase. All the accusations made against me were found to be without merit, but the person making them continues to make them. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 12:36, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Obama's selection as editor==<br />
This article states as if it were a fact that Obama was chosen for this position on the basis of his race. However the references don't say that - they do say that a person ''might'' be selected on the basis of affirmative action, but there is nothing to indicate that Obama's selection was on this basis. We need to fix this. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 13:46, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Michael Moore==<br />
"the lying, deceitful films of Michael Moore". What, are we deliberately trying not to get taken seriously here? How can we go around accusing other people of bias and then expressing what is clearly someone's opinion as if it were fact? [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 14:04, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, it's pretty much a proven fact that Moore deceptively edits his films. Two examples in particular are his acquisition of a gun at a bank and his manipulation of statements made by Charlton Heston. Those are just two out of many that immediately come to mind. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 14:07, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:It's bias to push this point up front. We don't describe Richard Nixon as "liar and felon" every time we talk about him. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 15:18, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Analysis of Claims ==<br />
<br />
I am One For Logic (also spelled oneforlogic or Oneforlogic), a regular user and editor of Wikipedia for several years. I began reading some articles on Conservapedia a few weeks ago. This is an interesting project. I will readily admit that the quality of writing and sourcing of articles in Wikipedia is not always the highest, so in the spirit of supporting well-intentioned dissent (which is what I’m assuming this is; let me know now if I’m wrong) I’m going to check on the claims on this page and explain what I find. If I conclude that any of these claims are valid, I will discuss and attempt to edit the relevant Wikipedia articles myself. I expect many of you will want to comment on this effort; please do so in the next section. I welcome your input. Signed [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 15:01, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
'''Current Issue 1: SDI'''<br />
<br />
Wow, you guys are good at this. Slow down on the new claims a little so I can keep up. I'll study the SDI article later. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 19:16, 4 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
'''Current Issue 2: Controversy Sections'''<br />
<br />
The articles provided as examples are definitely organized differently. If any Conservapedia editor is sufficiently knowledgeable about Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, or Jane Fonda and would like to take the time to reorganize the material in the Wikipedia articles, go for it. I'm afraid I don't know enough about any of them and don't have enough free time to reorganize the articles myself. I also don't think this is really a case of serious systematic bias; I'd need to see more examples before I'd be convinced. It may also be relevant to note that Wikipedia guidelines discourage use of "Controversy" sections, and that those sections in both the Limbaugh and Malkin articles had been flagged to be reorganized or otherwise improved. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 21:28, 3 July 2008 (EDT) <br />
<br />
: You describe a futile exercise, as many of us here have tried to edit out some of the liberal bias in Wikipedia. The mob there simply reinstates the bias and even seems to enjoy doing so.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:51, 3 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I'm sure you've been studying this longer than I have, but I have not yet encountered this angry liberal mob you describe. I have, just like all of you, had some of my edits falsely described as vandalism or removed without reason, but I have always discussed any changes to my work that seemed inappropriate and have often gotten useful feedback. Most of the people that care about an article enough to quickly revert edits they find disagreeable seem, in my experience, willing to discuss those edits. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 19:09, 4 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
: For more about how WP deals with these "Criticism/Controversy" sections read [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criticism Wikipedia's guideline on including Criticism] --[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 20:46, 4 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
'''Issue 3: GA status of Wikipedia's Conservapedia article<br />
<br />
I would not have nominated this article to be listed as a good article. You were correct that the new cite on that statement did not ''explicitly'' state that Conservapedia contains factual errors. I have since revised the statement to more closely reflect what the article does say, which is still harshly critical of Conservapedia. <br />
<br />
Update: I've been going back and forth on this with a few other editors. Most of the other editors agree that we need very explicit sources to claim that Conservapedia has factual errors. I am now convinced that we have three, and I have attached all of them to the 'factual errors' claim in the introduction. I still don't think the first cite on that claim supports it, but the editor that insists on including it hasn't responded to my discussion thread for a couple days. I do now believe that the claim is sufficiently verified. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 19:09, 4 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: "Oneforlogic", you lack logic here and show your own bias. The "factual errors" claim is an obvious smear and the citations both utterly fail to support the claim and are absurdly biased themselves. You seem to think it's OK to cite a heavily biased source to justify a smear. It isn't, obviously. Conservapedia has no more "factual errors" than any other wiki. If you persist in asserting this harmful smear, then I'm unlikely to bother reviewing any of your other arguments further. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:38, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
"Both" citations? Which ones were you looking at? Both occurrences of the factual inacuracy claim now have 4 citations: one (#8, the Guardian article) that I believe does not directly address factual errors but is favored by another editor (and does mention that liberals engage in factual relativism as often as conservatives, which I consider generally true), and three that, while they address other issues and are obviously not supportive of Conservapedia, do directly discuss factual issues. I'm certainly not arguing in any way that Wikipedia is error-free, or even particularly more accurate than Conservapedia; I'm looking specifically at the claim made by previous editors to Wikipedia's article on Conservapedia that Conservapedia has factual errors. I currently consider this a sufficiently verified claim.<br />
<br />
If there must be an agenda or conspiracy behind my actions here, it is this: I want to improve Wikipedia in whatever small ways I can as an individual editor, and I want to come to understand the conflict between conservatives and liberals better. I don't consider myself either, and you'd find that my political inclinations really don't line up consistently with either general ideology. If you're interested in any particular examples, let me know and I can post a few on my user page here. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 21:15, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Sir, you call yourself "Oneforlogic", but you haven't even quoted my concise reply in a logical matter. Read it again, and then read your quote of "'both' citations." Hopefully you can see yourself the flaw in your analysis of my straightforward reply.<br />
<br />
: The broader point is this: Wikipedia's biased smear of Conservapedia is unsupported by the citations and contrary to logic, yet you now defend it primarily because another editor at Wikipedia wants it to stay. Alas, that is the essence of liberal bias on Wikipedia. Wikipedia bias is not a conspiracy; it's bullying by liberals until others simply give in because they don't care to oppose it. Needless to say, Conservapedia editors are cut from a different cloth: we do care about the truth and we don't allow here the smears, half-truths, and gossip that plague Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:06, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: If I may ask, the page on Barack Obama starts off with the claim that he wasn't born in Hawaii (http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert is a scan of his birth certificate), claims that he is islamic and makes use of a number of smears, half truths, and repeating of gossip. If it is as important as you say that these things are not allowed on Conservapedia, who should we see about getting the page unlocked and rewritten in an honest and truthful manner? --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 22:33, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: "Rutm", your comment is off-topic because the issue here is Wikipedia bias and Conservapedia accuracy. Our entry about Obama is accurate and your comment is misleading in claiming that our Obama entry is otherwise. Proper questions have been raised by an objective Israeli news service about the authenticity and type of Obama's birth certificate (why is the certificate number blotted out, for example, which would reflect the time the certificate was issued?). Also, "Rutm", as I've indicated before, your insulting name is getting tiresome. Request a change to your real first name and last initial or your account will be blocked, and you can push your liberal POV on Wikipedia instead.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:38, 6 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::Excuse me for being unable to reply more quickly, Aschafly, as someone seems to have blocked my normal account. So you meant “both” as in “the citations fail to meet both objectives” instead of “both citations fail to meet the objectives”. You know as well as I do that these are equally valid interpretations. My apologies for being such a liberal idiot that I picked the wrong one. <br />
<br />
::::So, to be clear, instead of having an honest and open discussion of the other editor’s views and thoughts on his work, you would have me arbitrarily remove it without discussing it? That is completely contrary to the purpose of a wiki-based project. The wiki format only really works if people collaborate and discuss their differences, openly and publicly. You’ve made it clear that you are not comfortable with any working conditions in which you exercise less than complete control. I even offered to defend ''your side'' in this issue and you still brand me as your enemy by locking out my account.<br />
<br />
::::I really did hope to learn about conservatives and their conflicts with liberals here. And, in a way, I guess I still did. I already knew that radical liberals could be hostile and repressive toward people with views they disagree with, now I know that radical conservatives are just as bad. It’s kind of ironic that in that way, at least, the two extremes are exactly alike. Signed, [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]], aka [[User:OneAgainstRepression|OneAgainstRepression]] 13:42, 6 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
Ok, another idea, since you probably still need convincing on my good intentions, let's talk about an interesting caveat in Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Contrary to popular opinion, WP:NPOV indicates that all majority or large minority views on an issue should be presented in the relevant article, preferably in proportion to their level of support. It does not state that only neutral views should be presented. I imagine you had already read such policies carefully, but it's good to remember for context. So, to prove my goodwill, do you know of a source that supports Conservapedia's factual accuracy? If you do, post a link on my talk page and I will add mention of it to the Wikipedia article and defend the source if/when it is removed. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 22:02, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
'''Issue 4: Liberal Criticism'''<br />
<br />
I believe that any liberal bias present in Wikipedia is far less systematic than Conservapedia admins would have us believe, but I’m not going to go read every Wikipedia article to try to evaluate such a general claim. More specifically, the article on Debbie Riddle is fairly short, so the ‘free education comes from Russia’ quote will easily dominate the article until it is expanded. I highly doubt that any Wikipedia editor would object to more information on her accomplishments being added. Chuck Schumer’s article does indeed speak favorably of him at several points; there is a healthy discussion of the article’s neutrality in the discussion page. I’ll look for sources critical of the senator and add them to that discussion soon. Of course, any and all Conservapedia users are welcome to do the same.<br />
<br />
'''Issue 5: Obama’s selection as an editor on the Harvard Law Review'''<br />
<br />
Your own source makes this issue clear; in 1982, the Review adopted a policy that allowed editors to consider race while selecting new editors but did not provide for specific racial quotas. This source does discuss a short-lived quota-like policy, created in 1981, that was quickly replaced by the much less specific 1982 racial consideration policy. It cannot be clearly established how much this policy contributed to Obama’s selection as an editor, and as the Wikipedia article in question does not and should not focus on the specific policies of the Review, it seems acceptable to me that this article does not highlight this policy. <br />
<br />
'''Issue 6: Censorship'''<br />
<br />
The Wikipedia article on censorship does need to be expanded by an expert. I am not familiar with any specific cases of prayer, pro-life advertisements, or conservative newspapers being successfully censored, but I know that attempts to censor these things are made and they should be mentioned in the article. Let me know if any of you know of good sources of more detailed information on this kind of censorship. However, the article does discuss the issue of censoring discussion of creationism in public schools. The article indicates that many religious groups feel that not being allowed to teach creationism is censorship; it goes on to reference two court cases that established, first, that teaching creationism is equivalent to promoting the Christian faith and is illegal in public schools, and second, that intelligent design is a form of creationism. Regardless of your opinion on these issues, the Wikipedia article does cite and explain (in separate articles) the relevant court cases, which seems to me to be a completely legitimate way to discuss censorship of intelligent design.<br />
<br />
'''Issue 7: Smearing Conservapedia'''<br />
<br />
Wikipedia’s article on Conservapedia appears to have been discussed and improved a lot in recent months, and I would consider the current version ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conservapedia&oldid=221432211 13:49, 24 June 2008]) to be at least decently written and sourced. Wikipedia’s article no longer cites that particular New York Times source. There are, indeed, a great many sources that criticize Conservapedia as biased or just plain humorous, and I have not yet found any sources of serious support for Conservapedia. If any of you know of such a source, it may be worth adding to Wikipedia’s article. You may be technically correct that criticisms of Conservapedia’s factual accuracy, specifically, are rare, but that would only be because so many of the critical articles out there just skip straight to denouncing Conservapedia as a joke and don’t really seriously analyze it. Whether this is fair and proper or not is a separate debate. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 10:57, 24 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
'''Issue 8: Homosexual Agenda'''<br />
<br />
The Wikipedia article on Robert Maplethorpe does mention criticism of his “sexually-charged photographs of black men” and the “racial undertones of [his] imagery”; this article could benefit from being expanded generally, and a reference to the biographer cited here could be a useful addition. The Wikipedia article on the American Family Association’s section on the group’s anti-Semitism now has many citations, most of which seem to legitimately support their claims. It is possible that some of these are recent additions. <br />
<br />
Regarding the alleged “homosexual agenda” in general: I believe that both sides are handling this issue badly. The anger and indignation on both sides become harder and harder to calm as the conflict goes on. There are always moderate solutions to be found if both sides are willing to look for them and negotiate with each other. Being "anti-gay" and "anti-Christian" are both pointless positions; the average viewpoint of society will, inevitably, end up somewhere between the extremes. <br />
<br />
<br />
I'll continue to add more as I have time to do so.<br />
<br />
== Reactions ==<br />
<br />
I look forward to your feedback. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 15:02, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== There were some notable incidents in the media ==<br />
<br />
One was the SlimVirgin/Linda Mack stuff. A lot of press. Then there was the Gary Weiss/Mantanmoreland socking that for years he got away with using lots of sock puppets to spin biases in favor of illegal activity and anyone who tried to stop him was banned. This was in the media a lot, but not as much as the Linda Mack spy stuff. Then there was the Harsbara Fellowships, a group that hired people to insert biases into the encyclopedia and was led by one of their top administrators, Jayjg, though this doesn't have as much news article as the other two. Anyone else familiar with these? They are well known. I don't have any news articles right offhand, but could dig some up. It would help if others were familiar with this, too. [[User:RobertBobkins|RobertBobkins]] 15:14, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
I forgot, Rachel Marsden, there were some stuff about this in one online newspaper. She had an affair with Jimbo Wales and so he let her have her way in her biography. Then when news about this got out, Jimbo broke up with her on-wiki, instead of telling her in person and she found out indirectly. So she then sold Jimbo's clothes he left at her apartment on ebay. One shirt even had a peculiar white stain on it. I forgot if Jimbo Wales also is still married, but I think he is. [[User:RobertBobkins|RobertBobkins]] 15:17, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
: This article is ''examples of bias'' in Wikipedia. I think you want the [[Wikipedia]] article. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:21, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Six times==<br />
I'm sorry, but this is funny. One of the accusations of bias is that Wikipedia states "Conservapedia has asserted that Wikipedia is 'six times more liberal than the American public', a statistic which has been criticized for its poor extrapolation and lack of credibility." However further down the ''same page'' I find "twice as many Americans identify themselves as "conservative" compared with "liberal", and that ratio has been increasing for two decades. But on Wikipedia, about three times as many editors identify themselves as "liberal" compared with "conservative". That suggests Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public.".<br />
<br />
The latter calculation is of such astonishing naivity, and so laughable in it's lack of rigor, that it is totally unsurprising that Wikipedia ridicules it. If we allow statements like this we deserve to be the object of derision. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 15:26, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Aschlafly==<br />
Hi Aschlafly. I notice you just undid some changes I made to this page to reflect a) a logical inconsistency and b) something that was no longer true of Wikipedia. Would you like to explain what the problem was with my edits? [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 16:53, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Barak Obama==<br />
I removed some stuff about Barak Obama being selected as Harvard Law Editor on racial grounds. There was no reference to back it up, so it is not verifiable according to the Conservapedia commandments. The only reference described the affirmative action system of selection, but did not say that Obama benefitted from it (the description makes it clear that only about 20% of people selected are on the basis of affirmative action). [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 09:26, 24 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Title of the article==<br />
I was reading the manual of style, and it says "Titles should be in lowercase except for proper nouns". Shouldn't "bias" be lowercased? [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 13:50, 24 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== "Expelled" the only WP movie article which includes the phrase "nominal dollars" ==<br />
<br />
Parenthetical statement in the second sentence of the second paragraph [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed here]. I Googled "nominal dollars" for WP articles [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=active&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=frT&q=%22nominal+dollars%22+site:wikipedia.org&start=0&sa=N&filter=0 here] and found that the only movie that shows up is ''Expelled''. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed#.22In_nominal_dollars.3F.22 My complaint] against the use of the phrase has been met with lackluster defenses. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:30, 29 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:So I went ahead and added the same phrase into the top 5 documentary films' articles on WP just to see what would happen. Two of the edits remain untouched. Two have been relegated to the status of being turned into bottom-of-the-page reference note. The last one resulted in a disagreement between other editors whether or not the phrase could be applied to such a new movie (''An Inconvenient Truth''), with the deletion of the phrase winning out so far. Let the record show that ''Expelled'' is newer than ''An Inconvenient Truth''. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:54, 1 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Wikidrama due to anti-ID bias ==<br />
<br />
A request for arbitration regarding the behavior of an anti-ID editor [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Orangemarlin here], which resulted in his threat to leave, his leaving and then his immediate return and the other anti-ID editor named leaving. In fact, lots of the anti-ID editors are involved. I believe it's all an extension of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Intelligent_Design this]. As long as ID is treated as it is on Wikipedia, this will continue to be a perfect storm of contempt, bias and controversy. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 02:25, 29 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Should out-n-out fraud be considered bias in Wikipedia?==<br />
<br />
Or maybe just to common. That story of the fired WP editor, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257340,00.html , Fox News, Wikipedia Editor Out After False Credentials Revealed, March 8, 2007</ref> --[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 14:20, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Kind of old. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 14:40, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== WP "Quote-mining" article nothing more than an anti-Creationism hit piece ==<br />
<br />
Check it out [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quote_mining here]. Also see the discussion page [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Quote_mining here]. Lots of claims of this supposedly being a "well-documented" practice among Creationists, but little if any evidence of that is provided. Try to edit the article to reflect this fact and the evolutionist cabal is quick to revert it under false pretenses. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 15:54, 14 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Username "ChristianityMeansFreedom" judged to be "profane, disruptive, or otherwise inappropriate" ==<br />
<br />
Holy cow! I wouldn't have believed it without seeing it for my own eyes.<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ChristianityMeansFreedom Block message on user page]<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=223450235#Disruptive_editor_User:ChristianityMeansFreedom Admin noticeboard history]<br />
<br />
The guy's edits weren't even that horrible. Certainly not vandalism. They might have taken some time to discuss the edits with the user, but they judged the user name to be offensive. Right. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:10, 22 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:That user was blocked for his provocatively anti-semitic edits, not his name. Perhaps he should have stuck to posting his right wing garbage over on the [[Stormfront]] forums. [[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|שועל]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 10:19, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::But that's not the reason given for blocking him. And I looked at his edits. I saw nothing that was obviously anti-Semitic. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 10:30, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::It says in very clear letters: '''"This account has been blocked indefinitely because it has become apparent that the account is only being used for vandalism."''' The fact that the name could be further construed as an anti-semitic sentiment, given the edit history of the vandal, was mentioned as an additional support for the user account being blocked. The discussion on the admin board is about his propensity for altering articles dealing with Christianity and Judaism to make digs at Jews and Judaism. And they're blatantly obvious. [[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|שועל]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 10:49, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
Jinxmchue you said "I saw nothing that was obviously anti-Semitic". Did you not see this one here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Christianity_and_Judaism&diff=prev&oldid=211498797]<br />
or do you not think it is anti-semitic? A quick glance through his contributions show them almost all to be anti-semitic [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=ChristianityMeansFreedom&namespace=&year=&month=-1]--[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 11:03, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Antisemitism in the New Testament? ==<br />
<br />
This is cleanly mislead, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_New_Testament]. All I found is people got wrong ideas. I was thinking about adding to the list, but I'm not sure, yet. --[[User:TagoPagdaluhong|TagoPagdaluhong]] 21:28, 26 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Wikipedia acknowledges all subjects and opinions. Conservapedia does not. Hmmm, which one is biased? ==<br />
<br />
TSIB. Step back a minute & think about what you are really objecting to in Wikipedia. What you perceive as bias is the exact opposite. Wikipedia explores all subjects and acknowledges diverse attitudes to them, without jumping to conclusions. It maintains a neutral point of view, since any additions have to be backed up with reliable evidence. You may choose to regard this as "liberal bias", but that is only because Wikipedia does not censor and interpret its subjects as Conservapedia does. Conservapedia does not even pretend to have a neutral point of view. It wears its bias on its sleeve and openly propogates intolerant viewpoints. And it's for this exact reason that Conservapedia, unlike Wikipedia, will never be regarded as a factual or "trustworthy" reference source by the wider community. [[User:BeReasonable|BeReasonable]] 20:43, 27 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Please read [[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]]. Everything you level as accusations is freely admitted and explained. And incidentally, Wikipedia is not regarded as a factual or trustworthy reference source by most educators and experts. Try to use it as a source on a term paper and you will more than likely get called on it. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 22:37, 27 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Of course wikipedia is not a "trustworthy" reference with regards to the scientific/academic community, and by no means is CP. Any website that is openly editable is inherently un-trustowrthy for academia. Wikipedia, however, is a trustworthy reference for the average user, the user who wants a good overview of the subject in question, the user that wants the facts with as little bias or spin as possible. Wikipedia never claims to be an academic resource (and no decent academic would ever consider it as such, even in highschool, wikipedia is never considerd a "citable" source) but rather a means to get the "gist" of a topic and a gateway to more reliable sources. Do not try and put words in the wikipedia mission statement. --[[User:AndrasK|AndrasK]] 11:13, 28 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== John Edwards ==<br />
Wikipedia is getting hammered over its censorship of the “John Edwards love child” story [http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/07/28/wikipedia-disallows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal] [http://gawker.com/5029921/john-edwards-wikipedia-page-strangely-love-child+free] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2052379/posts] [http://conservativepulse.com/home/2008/07/edwards-sex-scandal-still-hasnt-surfaced-in-the-mainstream-press/]. This story has a gossipy feel and Conservapedia discourages gossip. However, several different outlets have reported it. I think it should be included as an example of wiki’s bias, but would like to know what other people think because of the gossipy nature of the story. [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 21:33, 28 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
:An entry I made about John Edwards was deleted [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia&diff=493702&oldid=493701]. This nature of this story is gossipy, but this page is primarily about bias in wikipedia. It’s worth mentioning that wikipedia allows gossipy stories with no credible sources about McCain because he is a Republican, but censors a similar credible story about Edwards because he is a Democrat. Is there a way the entry could be reworded so that it is acceptable? [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 18:36, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: You're so right that Wikipedia promotes gossip about conservatives, but immediately deletes it about liberals. This does illustrate Wikipedia's liberal bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:10, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:After the John Edwards hotel story became common knowledge, some wikipedia editors attempted to add it to his page. However, a wikipedia administrator deleted that information and locked the page to prevent the story from being included [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Edwards&diff=228426613&oldid=228425805]. Locking the pages of liberals when critical stories appear about them in the media is standard operating procedure at wikipedia. [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 22:05, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
::As of the time I'm writing this, Wikipedia's article on Edwards [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Edwards&oldid=228904206#2008_Presidential_campaign has]:<br />
::"In July 2008, several news media outlets speculated that Edwards' chances for the vice presidency were harmed by allegations published in The National Enquirer that he had fathered a child outside his marriage, and that he had recently visited the child's mother at the Hilton Hotel in Beverly Hills, California.[59][60][61] Edwards refused to comment on the allegations, stating "I've responded, consistently, to these tabloid allegations by saying I don't respond to these lies and you know that."[62]"<br />
::So now that the ''real'' non-tabloid media has gotten to that story, editors have accepted addition of this information as long as this isn't given undue weight. Whew, we just got saved from another stigma on this page! Now, I'd like to make it clear that me & most other WP editors frown upon tabloids (e.g. ''National Enquirer'', ''New York Post'', ''The Sun'') as sources. Regarding "gossip about conservatives": what suddenly came to my mind was that infamous ''[[New York Times]]'' article that accused [[John McCain]] of having an affair with Vicki Iseman. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_McCain&oldid=228831017 WP's article on McCain] makes absolutely no mention of Iseman, but it ''is'' mentioned in WP's article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_The_New_York_Times&oldid=222054349#John_McCain-lobbyist_article_criticism "Criticism of The New York Times"].--[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 20:11, 30 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::Furthermore, Wikipedia tries hard [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinksearch&target=*.nationalenquirer.com not to source] the ''NatEnq'' in articles. --[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 20:20, 30 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Disagreeing with this article==<br />
I have to disagree with the statements made in this article, mainly because the people who are writing it have a strong conservative bias, (it seems to assume that all liberals are wrong and immoral, and that their opinions aren't valid) and that Wikipedia cannot be perfect. There is not a single entity that creates, reviews, and edits articles, it is millions of people across the globe. With that kind of userbase, bias will be inevitable. It is up to others to notice and repair that bias, as long as they add a properly sourced opinion for the other side, and that they keep original opinions intact. You see, if YOU spot bias, YOU can fix it. For example, for #11, just go fix it! The biography is a valid source, since it is a book and had to be published which has far less margin for error than, let's say, a blog. So just edit the article to say that some claim he is racist, cite the source, leave the so-called "liberal" opinion so it isn't conservatively biased, and you're done! Bias eliminated. A bias is favoring an opinion, whether it be "right" or "wrong", and lack of bias is showing all opinions. Conservapedia has a strong conservative bias, and it should recognize that, and understand that right and wrong is in the eye of the beholder, and understand the opinions of liberals and why they hold them, even if they disagree. [[User:Jedibob5|Jedibob5]] 15:46, 2 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: No, "right and wrong is" NOT "in the eye of the beholder," and Wikipedia is ruled by a liberal mob. Trying to fix something there is like trying to reason with a lynch mob. I think several of our points demonstrate what happens when someone tries to correct the bias to certain entries.<br />
<br />
: It takes affirmative steps, like laws and even-handed enforcement of them, to prevent lynch mobs from forming. Wikipedia does nothing to curb the bias that even you admit is inevitable.<br />
<br />
: As to Conservapedia, it discloses its point of view. Wikipedia should be honest and do the same.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:53, 2 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::First point, Liberals think that their ideas are "right", and conservatives are "wrong", and conservatives think the exact same thing about liberals. All right and wrong is is an opinion in itself. For instance, I believe that abortion, for instance, is wrong, since it kills a child, while another person over there might think that my ideas are wrong, and that outlawing abortion would strip freedom of choice from women. So the definitions of right and wrong are different from person to person, so really, they are "in the eye of the beholder."<br />
<br />
::Second point, lynch mobs? WP goes by consensus when there's a conflict, but you can't compare that to a lynch mob. The United States of America does that during an election, which elects those who will make decisions in our government based on consensus, and the ancient Romans decided on consensus as well back when they were a republic. Lynch mobs act on their own sense of vigilante justice, and care not for consensus.<br />
<br />
::Third point, "Wikipedia does nothing to curb the bias that even you admit is inevitable." Well, I don't really think that Conservapedia can really say that they do either, can they? And what WP does about curbing this is relying on the editors to do the corrections. Pointing out bias doesn't mean that Wikipedia condones it, it just means no one has got around to fixing it.<br />
<br />
::If you try to blame Wikipedia for being liberally biased, all you are doing is blaming the editors, who, invariably, have different opinions. WP cannot be blamed for the stuff that gets put on it, since WP does not put it on there, editors do. [[User:Jedibob5|Jedibob5]] 12:13, 5 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::Just because everyone subjectively '''thinks''' that they are right (after all, how can one possibly believe something and simultaneuously consider that belief wrong?) that doesn't make right and wrong subjective. Some issues truly can be called matters of opinion (i.e. not right or wrong, and no real "incorrect" either). However the "conservative" position (& therefore CP's '''acknowledged''' position) is that right & wrong are objective, absolute issues. The "liberal" position of existentialism (which you apparently subscribe to) is ''practiced'' (sort of) on WP but not acknowledged. Ironically, subscribing to the existenitalist/subjective view disallows you from disagreeing with conservative/objective view.<br />
<br />
:::Also, you idealise WP somewhat - and reveal a sizable dose of naivetee - if you truly believe what you posted about "consensus" and "no one has got around to fixing it". As one who has seriously attempted to "fix it" and to build consensus I can tell you that that is simply not how WP works, which is what most of the items in this article demonstrate. You also falsely separate WP from its editors; WP ''is'' the body of its editors/admins/oversight. They write the articles, they write the guidelines, they write the policies, they mediate and arbitrate disputes, they grant and remove editor rights.[[User:LowKey|LowKey]] 22:35, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Baraminology==<br />
"The Wikipedia entry on baraminology (a form of taxonomy) describes it as "pseudoscience" and "unrelated to science" simply because it was devised by a creationist. [6]"<br />
<br />
Interestingly, that doesn't seem to be what the Wikipedia article said as of 07:21, 25 July 2008:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Baraminology has been heavily criticized for its lack of rigorous testing and post-study rejection of data to make it better fit the desired findings.[13] Baraminology is a pseudoscience, and has not produced any peer-reviewed scientific research,[14] nor is any word beginning with "baramin" found in Biological Abstracts, which has complete coverage of zoology and botany since 1924.[15] Universal common descent, which states that all life shares a common ancestor, is well-established and tested, and is a scientifically-verified fact.[16] However, neither cladistics, the field devoted to investigating the ancestral relationships between living things, nor the scientific consensus on transitional fossils are accepted by baraminologists.[17]</blockquote><br />
<br />
As far as I'm aware, the lack of peer-revied scientific research claim is correct, and worth noting. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 15:57, 3 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I have read somewhere (I don't remember where, so I can't cite it) that there has been one peer-reviewed research study on baraminology that has been published so far. [[User:CogitoErgoSum|CogitoErgoSum]] 09:32, 4 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Curse the darkness, or light a candle?==<br />
<br />
I've got to thinking, why do we curse the darkness when we could just light a candle? Instead of coming here to complain about examples of bias on Wikipedia, why not just edit them out when you find them? [[User:CogitoErgoSum|CogitoErgoSum]] 11:34, 5 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Because that has been attempted by many of us, only to find the edits diluted or censored and bias reinserted.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:20, 20 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Founder of The Weather Channel removed from Category:Global Warming skeptics==<br />
<br />
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)&diff=232272809&oldid=227980118<br />
<br />
100+ scientists, and other global warming skeptics were removed from the category:Global Warming skeptics, because wikipedia decided to delete the category --<span style="margin-top: -3px;">&nbsp;[[Image:50 star flag.png|12px]]</span><span style="position:relative; overflow:hidden; width:88px; height:15px; z-index:2;"> [[User:Deborah|Deborah]] [[Special:Contributions/Deborah|<font color="gray">(contributions)</font>]] [[User_talk:Deborah|<font color="darkslategray">(talk)</font>]]<br />
[[Special:Emailuser/Deborah | email me]]</span> 21:57, 20 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Fascinating, Deborah. Perhaps that should be made into a point here somehow. Thanks for your insight.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:21, 20 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Actually, the reason why Wikipedia decided to delete the category was that its "overcategorization" guideline [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Overcategorization&oldid=233793984#Opinion_about_a_question_or_issue discourages] categorizing people by personal opinions on certain subjects.<br />
<br />
== Pinochet and Castro ==<br />
While the part about Castro is worth mentioning, we shouldn't exactly be quick to defend Pinochet. After 9/11 when they were investigating all sorts of money laundering schemes, the United States Senate discovered a huge network of money laundering accounts run by Pinochet and Sen. [[Norm Coleman]] referred to him in the [http://www.senate.gov/~levin/newsroom/release.cfm?id=233631 same report] as "a well-known human rights violator and violent dictator." It would be better to leave Pinochet out of the bullet point and focus on Castro. --[[User:Ampersand|Ampersand]] 23:24, 8 September 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== POV on this ==<br />
<br />
I think this article's tone should be edited. It tries to slam liberals on everything, rather than letting the facts speak for themselves. I do agree that something needs to be done though.<br />
[[User:RussellSprouts|RussellSprouts]] 20:51, 10 September 2008 (EDT) (Sorry forgot to sign)<br />
==Misrepresentations==<br />
I don't expect anything to change, but I feel I should point out a few problems with this page nevertheless:<br />
:2: [deletion of GW skeptics category] The category was deleted because it was poorly defined, not to whitewash. The weather channel guy's article still makes clear his opinion on the subject.<br />
:3: [Claims in the Gardisil article] The claims are backed up by reliable sources. Until they are contradicted by other reliable sources, I'm not sure what one would expect to do about this.<br />
:8: [Removal of claims about John Edwards] The Edwards affair was left out when the only source was the Enquirer, which WP does not consider reliable (for obvious reasons). It was added in very short order, and now the affair has an article of its own [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards_extramarital_affair].<br />
:9: [Cold fusion] Cold fusion is controversial, and the article makes no claim that it has been successfully carried out. I fail to see what "liberal" about cold fusion. If it can be performed, it would solve a great proportion of the world's energy problems. That is not a partisan issue.<br />
:11: [Avoiding the word "controversy" for liberals] The Jane Fonda article has sections clearly labeled "Vietnam War Controversy" and "Hanoi Jane".<br />
:12 and 16 are basically redundant, and inaccuracies on Conservapedia are cited.<br />
:20: [Article on gun politics] The phrase in question is a caption for a photograph, the photograph is not provided as "proff" for anything. The fact that the right to bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights shows that guns were a political issue.<br />
:21: [Expelled as a propaganda film] The film is no longer in that category.<br />
:50: [North American Union] There is now an article on this.<br />
There many are others that aren't even worth addressing, though I feel I should mention the BCE issue, as it if oft cited. If you have any questions about the preferred use, type "4 BCE" into the search box at Wikipedia and see what you are redirected to. [[User:BrianH|BrianH]] 12:50, 16 September 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Improvements?===<br />
Over the past month or so I've also tried improving certain wikipedia entries based on some concerns raised by editors of this page.<br />
*[[Marcus Borden]]: Since the section regarding the controversy over his prayer wasn't sourced, I researched on it and rewrote based on sourced. Additionally, I removed the biased language in question and instead focused on showing the reader the facts. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=East_Brunswick_Public_Schools&oldid=233151082#Football_coach_prayer_controversy]<br />
*[[James Monroe]]: I added this: "During his presidency, Congress demanded high subsidies for internal improvements, such as for the Cumberland Road.[2] Monroe vetoed the Cumberland Road Bill, which provided for yearly improvements to the road, because he believed it to be "unconstitutional" for the government to pass such a bill.[3]"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Monroe&oldid=238834883#Policies]<br />
*Philadelphia lawyer: Clarified that the Zenger case merely ''inspired'' the term.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philadelphia_lawyer&oldid=229926894]--[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 21:47, 16 September 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Also regarding some other issues raised on this talk page and the main page:<br />
*Profanity: The profanity policy I provided states that profanity in quotes can never be censored. Most of the time it's okay to paraphrase a quote that contains a profanity for the sakes of taste, and sometimes it's absolutely necessary to include uncensored profanity when all other choices are lost (i.e. the title of some vulgar songs).<br />
*Bias for evolution and against intelligent design, without disclosing? Actually Wikipedia has FAQ pages regarding why articles about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Evolution/FAQ evolution] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Intelligent design/FAQ intelligent design] are written that way; it's that Wikipedia is following the scientific consensus accepting evolution and rejecting ID. I recall Aschlafly stating on a talk page that "Wikipedia should imply its POV" just like Conservapedia [[Conservapedia:Differences with Wikipedia|does]] too.<br />
*[[Benazir Bhutto]] and abortion: Bhutto's pro-life stance was added on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benazir_Bhutto&diff=196024457&oldid=195739121 March 5, 2008] and remained on the article afterwards. --[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 17:33, 17 September 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Cause of Bias -- Lack of Oversight? ==<br />
<br />
I have recently been concerned over an extreme bias shown by Wikipedia editors on the English version of their web page describing the Falun Gong [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_gong] cult. This cult originated in China and has been the subject of many debates regarding how the Falun Gong followers have been treated by the Chinese government. What caught my attention is that there are material facts about the cult which are not discussed on the Wikipedia page. Digging into the mystery of the omissions, I examined the related "Discussions" page [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Falun_Gong]. I found that others have raised the issue of bias and missing information. However, the moderators refuse to allow any information critical of the Falun Gong onto the main page. For example, Falun Gong teaches that its practitioners can gain super-human powers such as levitation and clairvoyance and that there are two-billion year-old nuclear reactors in Africa [http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2922644]. Of course, there are more concerning omissions from the Wikipedia site than these strange beliefs. Their leader, Li Hongzhi, a former government grain department clerk and amateur trumpet player, claims demons and extraterrestrials are everywhere and that practitioners truly adhering to the cult's principles won't be hurt as much when hit by speeding cars as they otherwise would [http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2922644]. <br />
<br />
Instead, all that is said of the cult is that it is so harmless and pure. I have tried posting my concerns on the Wikipedia discussions page in recent days. My posts were deleted within minutes of submitting. This is frightening in that there are some individuals who rely on Wikipedia, for good or for ill, as a reliable source of information.<br />
==DOMA and Prop 8==<br />
Quick FYI. by law, in a FEDERAL government like ours, the definition of marriage is for the states to do, as it should be. Some states allow girls to marry at 14, others at 16, and others at 18. some states have the same ages for boys to marry as for girls. Still other states they are different ages. As a conservative, it's important to me that the Federal government does not overstep its authority to regulate things and become "big government". (this comment, by the way, has nothing to do with the prop 8 election which is exactly where this issue belongs. in the hands of the '''voters''' of each state! (ie, not the COURTs which like to step in)--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 15:39, 23 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: JeanJacques, you're entitled to your opinion, but your preface "as a conservative" is misplaced. The overwhelming percentage of conservatives do support DOMA. What's next, for you to say that "as a conservative" you're "pro-choice"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:19, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Pope XIII? ==<br />
<br />
Isn't that just simple vandalism? Vandalism ''you could have fixed'' instead of rambling here about how Wikipedia professes hatred by mockingly creating pages linking to him? --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 18:14, 25 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Is it vandalism? How can we be so sure about that noncited accusation of AlanS? 'I could have changed', I wouldn't contribute to them if you paid me. It is a pattern, ranked too darn high (no. 3), must have been there along time with the help of enabler and collaborator Google. Just change it, just vandalism Alan says. --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 18:25, 25 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:I think he meant it was vandalism at WP, not here. It seems to be a bunch of non-registered user who keep vandalizing it, but people seem to change it back often. As for not contributing, well, I suppose the "light a candle or curse the darkness" quote kind of applies. We probably shouldn't cite the WP article itself, since it doesn't always support the point. Maybe cite one of the differences instead? [[User:LiamG|LiamG]] 18:37, 25 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: It was there all of nine days, as one can easily see from the history. That is not "along [sic] time". It's nothing more than vandalism of the Wikipedia redirect. And AlanS is right: you ''could'' have fixed it. That you ''choose'' not to doesn't change that fact. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:22, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: We've discussed how Wikipedia will leave up some "vandalism", while reverting others. It's an example of Wikipedia's bias how some vandalism will remain while others are reverted immediately. You can bet many editors saw that edit during the nine days it remained, and left it there. It's irrelevant whether an outsider could have reverted it; the point here is to illustrate the bias of the editors who run Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:17, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
::: It was a redirect page. Very few editors have redirect pages on their watchlist. Vandalism to a redirect page could go unnoticed for some time. Furthermore, it was vandalism by an IP, so there is no basis for saying that the editors who "run" Wikipedia had anything to do with it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:29, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Many editors in control of Wikipedia watch the recent changes and revert nearly all vandalism immediately. But as this (and other) examples illustrate, some liberal vandalism is left unreverted by those editors.<br />
<br />
:::: This is a clear example of liberal bias at Wikipedia. Admittedly, bias-by-omission is slightly more abstract than bias-by-action, but the point is precisely the same and it's a mistake to exclude this type of illustration of liberal bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:12, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::: I didn't realise that Superman was an editor in control of Wikipedia. In about the last four minutes, there's been about 500 changes to Wikipedia (about two edits per second) so I have trouble understanding how they could possibly even read the recent changes list, let alone check out every edit. So no, although I totally agree that there is "liberal" bias at Wikipedia, this is not a clear example of it. On the contrary, it's a lousy example of it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:31, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Update, somebody changed Bill Oreilly/ Wikipedia link on Google. Still listed number three, still providing a link url of Pope Pius, still linking to Bill's article. Page title changed to Bill Oreilly instead Pope Pius. Still disrespectful, if somebody corrects I can monitor if it returns.--'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 21:14, 28 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::: I don't think that's changed at all. Google indexing entries are created automatically; they don't have people changing them manually (well, not for 99.9999% of them). The Google cache shows that it was indexed on 22nd October, during the time Wikipedia's redirect page pointed to Bill Oreilly, which was the case before, so although I don't recall the actually date of it before, I'd say it hasn't changed at all. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:34, 29 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== If you think wikipedia is biased towards liberals... ==<br />
<br />
Why don't you work to fix it? It's nobody's fault but your own, because instead of actively going out and making changes to wikipedia (which is the point of wikipedia), you just sit on your [] and complain about it.<br />
[[User:Bibendum|Bibendum]] 21:37, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:That has been asked and answered numerous times on this page, I believe. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 21:40, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Because I'm feeling helpful, and I just had this same question: here's a thread from the archives that might shed some light: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia/Archive6#Take_a_step_back]. Enjoy! --[[User:Xanthippe|Xanthippe]] 00:02, 27 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
::Thanks, I knew it was there somewhere. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:12, 27 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== 'Chain of being' ==<br />
<br />
<s>RodWeathers reinstated the 'consciousness' entry with the edit comment "''Evolution requires a 'chain of being,' including varying consciousness''". I would like to know what this means and how it addresses the concerns with this entry already explained earlier on this page. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:36, 29 October 2008 (EDT)</s><br />
<br />
: Philip, did you post this here by accident?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:46, 29 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:: Ummm, yep. It should have been on the [[Talk:Counterexamples to Evolution]] page. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:31, 30 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Fairness ==<br />
<br />
<br />
If there is a page on bias on Wikipedia, than why isn't there something similar on Conservapedia? One of your sysops admitted that Conservapedia has a conservative bias. If this site is to be trustworthy and unbiased, there should be such a page.--[[User:DM333|DM333]] 20:53, 10 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
== NAS ==<br />
Articles associated with the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_Scholars "National Association of Scholars"] are often a target of bias from [[liberal]] tag-team gangs. Ever since I read his book [http://books.google.com/books?id=NN7E3r_w09IC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Myth+of+the+scientific+method&ei=iehDSf6nCY3WlQSNkdjGDg ''...the Myth of the Scientific Method''], I've always had a great deal of respect for the author/scientist [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_H._Bauer Henry H. Bauer]. The Bauer page is one example of an article associated with NAS on wikipedia. Others can be found by looking through the links to the Bauer and to NAS articles: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Henry_H._Bauer&limit=500] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/National_Association_of_Scholars&limit=500]. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 12:01, 13 December 2008 (EST)<br />
::Here's a link to a much earlier version of the NAS article right before it was mauled by [[liberal]]s: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Association_of_Scholars&diff=202363151&oldid=202337351 "National Association of Scholars" (unbiased)] --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 13:59, 13 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
== What Lies by Wikipedia about Conservapedia? ==<br />
<br />
according to the first entry; "Wikipedia's entry about Conservapedia contains four unsupported smears in its very first sentence"<br />
<br />
what are the "Four Unsupported Smears"? I read the first sentence, and it seems reasonable to me.<br />
<br />
: If you don't see the smears, then I'm afraid that is most informative about your viewpoint.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 18:12, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::I don't really agree. the first sentence contains statements of fact. YEC, american etc. I don't wee what is a smear about that. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] <small>(CPAdmin1)</small><sup>[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]]</sup> <sup>[[User:CPAdmin1/Polls|Vote in my NEW polls]]</sup> 20:08, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::: The four terms in the first sentence are pejorative, particularly with respect to Wikipedia's audience. "right-wing"??? Please. The first sentence is also unsupported and unjustified, and thereby violates Wikipedia's own rules. We do not impose a point of view here.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 20:25, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
::::"''Conservapedia is an English-language wiki-based web encyclopedia project written from a young earth creationist, Americentric, right-wing and Conservative Christian point of view.''" Lets review the claims.<br />
::::1. English Language -- true<br />
::::2. wiki based -- true<br />
::::3. Web encyclopedia project -- true<br />
::::4. Young Earth Creationist -- We at least support the YEC position<br />
::::5. Americentric -- maybe.<br />
::::6. right-wing -- I think so. If we created a visual representation of the political spectrum, where would CP land?<br />
::::7. Conservative Christian --I don't see this one as a negative, and if we aren't then we should be.<br />
::::The claims may or may not be strictly true, but I think that from the outside, they appear to be.<br />
::::What about the POV that Obama is a muslim? we impose that one pretty strictly. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] <small>(CPAdmin1)</small><sup>[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]]</sup> <sup>[[User:CPAdmin1/Polls|Vote in my NEW polls]]</sup> 20:59, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
:::::Apart from the negative tone of the wikipedia lede (lead), it misses the mark. The connotation is off. Happens a lot with wikipedia articles. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 21:18, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
:::::In furtherance of Rick's observation, Tim, you apparently misunderstand this project and do not describe it accurately. We provide the truth and do not "impose" any point of view. If you can find any statement by me, or other Bureaucrat, or even senior Admin, that supports your claims above (#4-7), then I'd like to see it. I don't think it exists, and Wikipedia offers no support for its smear. I suggest you retract your unsupported claims, just as Wikipedia should.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:40, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
::::::Schlafly, if Conservapedia is not right-wing, what is it? I'm actually really confused right now. [[User:SJames|SJames]] 19:56, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::: Wikipedia doesn't say that "Conservapedia" is a "conservative encyclopedia" as the name suggests. Instead, Wikipedia tries to smear Conservapedia with unjustified, pejorative terms that is ''not'' representative of the name, the rules, or the content. This is a clear example of how Wikipedia does insist on a liberal and unsupported POV to smear people. See the main page for yet another recent example.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:16, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::What is the difference between being conservative and being right-wing? Its seems this site uses Liberal and Left-wing pretty much interchangeably, I would assume that right and left refer to the political spectrum. --[[User:TuckerM|TuckerM]] 21:21, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
:::::::SJames, you'd do yourself a favor if you opened your mind and learned from this site. 2+2=4 is not "right wing," and neither is the truth you'll find here. But you have free will to deny both, so suit yourself.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 20:35, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Not to worry, my mind is open. I understand right-wing may incorporate some of the far-right extremists, but to me, the terminology in itself carries no negative connotations. It's just reference to one half of the political spectrum. It's like the Boston Celtics objecting to being referred to as an "Eastern Conference team" because they don't want to be associated with the likes of the Charlotte Bobcats or the general inferiority of the Eastern Conference (though this year has been different!). My point is that there is no need to be defensive about it. If people ask me, "Are your beliefs on the right-wing?", I'll answer without taking offense, "Yes" and then clarify, "--Conservative Christian". [[User:SJames|SJames]] 14:53, 16 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I personally dont find the words wikipedia uses inaccurate (they are most certainly true), and i really feel the words there have negative connotations (nothing negative in right-wing to me or the others) but thats certainly subjective. --[[User:PMichael|PMichael]] 21:01, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm curious now too: ''why is it'' called Conservapedia then? '''[[user:FernoKlump|<font color="#000066" >FernoKlump</font>]]'''<sup>[[User:FernoKlump/petition|<font color="#bd2433" >Mr. Schlafly! Look at this petition!]]</font></sup> 20:58, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::You Don't try to impose any Point of View? Thats Funny, because I had stuff deleted on here earlier and was temporarily blocked from editing. <br />
::::::And I don't get what you are saying is misleading or smearing in there? Are you trying to argue that this wiki isn't from a Right-wing, Conservative Christian, YEC and Americentric Point of View? Its called CONSERVAPEDIA for Allah's Sake! That was the point I was trying to get across in the beginning from asking this question, not to be a jerk and get my stuff deleted and banned or whatever. --[[User:PatF|PatF]] 22:11, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
==Lawrence Solomon==<br />
Lawrence Solomon, the author of the 2008 book [[The Deniers]], wrote back in April 2008 an editorial piece titled [http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/4/18/hide-your-name-on-wicked-pedia-solomon.aspx "Hide your name on Wicked Pedia: Solomon"] about what newcomers to wikipedia should expect when they try to correct [[liberal]] bias. His experience was not pleasant. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 12:18, 16 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Article on Biblical Criticism==<br />
In wikipedia's article on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism Biblical Criticism] the [[Oxford Univeristy]]-Press-published referenced section regarding those who are interested in biblical criticism and hold to supernatural beliefs was removed. The phrasing of supernatural beliefs came from the [[Oxford University]] Press-Published book. Despite claims that removing well-referenced material is unacceptable, it has not been restored. It is clear that wikipedia does not enforce its "policies" on references. See here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Biblical_criticism&diff=259607288&oldid=259533753] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Biblical_criticism&diff=259236232&oldid=259205856].--[[User:RickD|RickD]] 22:28, 24 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
== I deleted "Wikipedia makes no mention of the fact that Eric Holder..." ==<br />
<br />
I deleted "Wikipedia makes no mention of the fact that [[Obama]]'s Attorney General [[Eric Holder]] called the United States a "nation of cowards" when it comes to the discussion of race."<br />
<br />
The citation was a link to an old revision of a Wikipedia page. The new revision DOES mention this. --[[User:Andrew1123|Andrew1123]] 17:22, 8 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Reference Needed for Claim that Wikipedia Called Bush a Nazi==<br />
<br />
The claim that G. W. Bush "was called a supporter of the Nazi regime" on his wikipedia page is very believable, but could someone find a reference proving it? [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 20:50, 9 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Is #150 really relevant? (The criticism of GWB/BHO) ==<br />
<br />
Looking back at the history of the "Presidency of George W. Bush" article, the Criticism section was not added to the article until July 5th, 2006. If Wikipedia had a liberal bias wouldn't they have added that much sooner? BHO has been in power for less then two months, not enough time to form a valid criticism of his presidency as a whole.<br />
<br />
:I'm sorry - and you are?<br />
::20:34, March 9, 2009 Dparker (Talk | contribs | block) New user <br />
::20:44, March 9, 2009 (hist) (diff) Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (→Is #150 really relavent? (The criticism of GWB/BHO): new section) <br />
:Do you have any interest here other than this issue?<br />
:Anyway, to answer your question, the articles are not simply about criticism of the men as they acted as president. They are about them in general. B.O. has been around quite a while before January 20, 2009. Was there no criticism of him before that date? Has there been no criticism of him after it? And what, pray tell, defines criticism as "valid" or not and what is the official figure for how much time must pass for the criticism to be worthy of Wikipedia? I mean, is criticism of George W. Bush's personality - his ''personality'' for crying out loud! - valid? This is a ridiculous line from the ridiculous WP article:<br />
:<blockquote>"Raised in West Texas, Bush's accent, vacations on his Texas ranch, and penchant for country metaphors contribute to his folksy, American cowboy image, which occasionally served as fodder for criticism."</blockquote><br />
:Oh, my dear Lord in Heaven, NOOOOOO!!!! His accent! His ranch! His metaphors! Why did we ever let such a man be president with all these valid criticisms?! Chimpeachment!<br />
:Okay, I freely admit that was gratuitous sarcasm, but it sure felt good.<br />
:Bottom line: the excuses people are putting forth to excuse the blatant B.O. worship and kowtowing on WP are lame and don't hold water. I know it. You know it. Everyone knows it. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:28, 16 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
The WP articles are referenced in the "example of bias" are "Presidency of" articles, not general articles. You would know if you read them. But I guess reading an article on a site with a "liberal bias" is a lot to expect from someone here. Laying the sarcasm so thick isn't helping your argument either. If you think that line is so ridiculous then you've obviously blocked out the last eight years from your memory, not to mention that his attitude is probably the weakest criticism anyone has of GWB. Also, it should be mentioned that if that page on WP is ridiculous, then how do you describe this: [[Religion of Barack Obama]]. The rabbit hole of crazy goes really deep here.<br />
<br />
: Your unsigned comment is incoherent. But in answer to your question, it is biased to point of absurdity to criticize Bush for his "accent" and his "ranch". Do you see similar criticisms of Obama and Ted Kennedy on Wikipedia???--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:13, 16 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Gothic architecture ==<br />
<br />
I am confused by the entry. It is maybe linked to the wrong wikipedia article? Because right now anyway, the article "Gothic Architecture" has its whole 3rd paragraph, out of 5 in the introduction section, about churches and cathedrals. And after that, there is the section "Religious influences" which is talking about christian monastary orders. Then it does mention moslems but only to say that their architecture had pointed arches, and i agree this is bias because there is no reason to think christians did not invent pointed arches themselves, but i still think that the entry bullet point makes little sense. The article mentions christianty in the third paragraph, after maybe 100 words not 1 500. It credits Christianity first and not moslems. It mentions christians many times through out, not "never mentioning christianity again." I am not saying it is unbiased but what we say about it is incorrect in fact. And it is strange to open with this, too. The list should start with the worst, like the black-list on intelligent design and climate sceptics, the celebirty gossip, and then on. [[User:ELeger|ELeger]] 00:24, 27 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== DRUDGE BIAS ==<br />
<br />
I don't have the time now but will somebody compare (and post a summary of) the existing Wikipedia DRUDGE REPORT and MATT DRUDGE entries with the existing Wikipedia entries for BILL MAHER, ARIANNA HUFFINGTON, and KEITH OLBERMANN? You will see that the DR and Matt Drudge, '''news aggregators,''' are cited in the first sentence as "conservative" while no such labels are applied to the latter '''pundits''' in even the first paragraph. Instead, they are buried well down the page or omitted entirely. In fact, it was the case recently that none were objectively called liberals but instead made use of sleight of hand, e.g., saying they had been critical of certain right-wingers at certain times, but not mentioning that they were proudly liberal. Good example of Wiki bias, in my estimation.<br />
<br />
: You're right. Thanks for your insight. Please add a point about this, or I will if you don't get around to it.<br />
<br />
Personally, whilst I don't disagree as such with your observations, there is still an element of bias in them as well. You have cited just 3 'liberal' examples against 2 'conservative' examples. Who's to say there aren't others on each side which in fact show the opposite to what these do. It seems highly selective to select these few for comparison. The Michael Moore article for example does state in the opening that he is a 'liberal', so basically I think you would have to see how wide ranging this is before calling it bias. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 18:59, 28 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Organizing instances in order of severity? ==<br />
<br />
While I don't really agree with the comment about "Gothic Architecture" above, the author may have a point: would it be better to list the most egregious examples of bias first? Perhaps have a section for the most blatant instances of bias, and then a section for other instances? It just seems like good common sense to present the strongest arguments first. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 18:00, 27 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Thank you ==<br />
<br />
Dear Conservapedia editors<br />
<br />
Firstly, I would like to disclose that I am a regular Wikipedia editor. I wanted to thank this site for this particular article. I regularly review it for errors Wikipedia might have missed, and whilst I don't agree that every complaint raised in this article is valid, a reasonable number have proven to be correct. This site, and I wish to stress I don't agree with a lot of it, does serve as a watchdog which many Wikipedia editors value for its investigations, and helps to keep us on our toes. Thanks again. [[User:Breithaupt|Breithaupt]] 14:52, 28 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Thank you! No place is immune from the benefits of "outside" eyes, offering suggestions or solutions. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 15:57, 28 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Thank you as well! ==<br />
<br />
:Thank you as well! I am sure that a growing number of contributors to Wikipedia are beginning to rethink their alleged objectivity and purveyors of unfettered information in a quest for the unvarnished truth, as well as a genuine effort "to present all sides" in a so-called fair manner, especially when "fairness" is tangible and wholly subjective in a multitude of cases. Their editorial staff once seemed to be the paragon of inclusion; now, an increasingly harsh tone of what cannot but be considered pious liberal subterfuge seems to confront the participant. Indeed, the forbearance manifested by the editors of Conservapedia - apparently from editors secure in their own intellect and the resilience of their faith - is a most nonthreatening and refreshing antithesis to those of us who have been savaged by an ever-noxious and insipid constriction of the truth or, as said, objectivity of the presentation. What one unfortunately faces on WP is a sort of editorial goon squad set about to investigate the alleged self-serving proprieties of them who deign to taint their presuppositions--tragic denial of their quest for greater information. I see in the current socio-religious (and socio-political) culture wars which currently afflict this nation a most disturbing phenomenon played out in the generation of information made available to the masses through the internet: The war of words and information waged between what appears to be an encroaching governmental superiority vs. the rights of man. If we are not careful, that which we feared the most shall come upon us--God help us all if the truth that sets us free is submerged in the blather of the self-righteous platitudes of so-called progressives whose purposeful and/or inadvertent desire is to manifest their disdain of any and all absolutes (especially those which the faithful project) - and in so doing, descend to a most horrible absolute wherein truth becomes fiction and fiction becomes the truth. The matter astounds - they who profess such indignity toward personal aggrandizement are countered (thankfully) by the accused who embrace their absolutes with calm and persistent expression of unfettered information which irritates the so-called guardians of information. Keep up the good work! [[User:Kriegerdwm|Kriegerdwm]] 00:13, 29 March 2009 (EDT)kriegerdwm[[User:Kriegerdwm|Kriegerdwm]] 00:13, 29 March 2009 (EDT)</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia&diff=645897Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia2009-03-29T04:12:28Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Thank you */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{unprotect|Ed Poor}}<br />
{| align=right border=3 cellspacing=0 style="border-width: 5px; border-color: #d0d0d0; background: #d0e0e0; margin: 2em;"<br />
| style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | [[/Archives|Archives]]<br />
|}<br />
<br />
<!-- ===============Archive below this line! Do not remove anything above this line.=========================== --><br />
<br />
==Farah Quote==<br />
<br />
The Joseph Farah quote on Wikipedia is good, but it's at the top of this page and at the top of the [[Wikipedia]] page. I think that one appearance of the quote is enough and that it fits in better on the wikipedia page. Does anyone else have an opinion? [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 13:18, 22 February 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
: I agree. You can move it into a new paragraph. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:53, 22 February 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
:: Done. [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 14:10, 22 February 2009 (EST)<br />
<br />
==Religious affiliation of Wikipedians==<br />
I edited several wikipedian user templates so that templates identifying one with religion a or atheism etc. will result in you being put in that category for example several atheist wikipedian user templates now put the user in the category Category:Atheist Wikipedians, if he/she puts the template on their userpage, revealing our current estimated amount of atheist/ and others is greatly underestimated there is 1722 atheist Wikipedians of which 17 are objectivist. Also we forgot agnostics there is 515 of them numbering about as much as the christian sample of wikipedia alone. There should be a part on the picture where it reveals the sample size. that means there is 2222 atheist or agnostics out of our sample wow! Way more than the sample for christians Please update the picture showing religious affiliation of Wikipedians--[[User:Java7837|Java7837]] 16:22, 28 February 2008 (EST)<br />
:Actually, I'd like to know where that graph came from in the first place. It was put there by [[user:Wahrheit|Wahrheit]], but I've not seen any explanation of where the figures came from. Unless Wahrheit can explain that, I think the graph should be removed as possibly bogus. And by the way, the graph ''does'' include agnostics, and how does 515 <s>outnumber</s> mean "about as much as" 789, the figure shown for Christians? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 21:32, 28 February 2008 (EST)<br />
::As there has been no explanation of the origin or basis of that graph, I will remove it as I suggested above. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 19:25, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== "Wikipedia has been called the National Enquirer of the Internet:[1]" ==<br />
<br />
I'm removing this claim because the source is very flimsy. An inactive blog written by a self proclaimed "eccentric" isn't a powerful enough position to put such a quote in the banner. [[User:Qc|Qc]] 18:57, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Isn't the National Enquirer the National Enquirer of the internet? Seems a bit like saying "The Beatles are the Rolling Stones of music." [[User:MrGrieves|MrGrieves]] 01:42, 6 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Graph: Number of people claiming a faith = 2179; Number of atheists = 1508. ==<br />
<br />
Is it just me, or are there more people of faith on wikipedia than atheists?<br />
<br />
The graph shows that the number of people claiming a faith = 2179 whilst the number of atheists = 1508.<br />
<br />
That's 60% believes, versus 40% disbelieves.<br />
<br />
Is wikipedia in fact "<U>faithist</U>"?<br />
<br />
It makes me wonder if we have any statistics regarding the number of atheists on Conserapedia versus the numbers from the faith groups? <br />
<br />
I really hope that Conservapedia (unlike wikipedia) is not bias to any one faith group. <br />
<br />
It would be a sorry day for "The Trustworthy Encyclopaedia" if it was dominated by any one faith group; would that be health, surely we wouldn’t want any one group’s view to dominate the others …<br />
<br />
Well lets hope not ...<br />
<br />
{{unsigned|Qgobo}}<br />
<br />
:Conservapedia is a conservative Christian resource primarily, I believe. That is the main viewpoint espoused, and I think the stated purpose.--[[User:TomMoore|TomMoore]] 23:07, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::: Tom, isn't that rather the point, wikipedia isn't a "Christian resource primarily", and thus it should be allowed to express a view other than the one seen here. If bias means subscribing to primarily one doctrine, then wikipedia is less bias than conservapedia. Wouldn't a better title for this page be "Where and how Wikipedia differs from Conservapedia"? However, perhaps your broader point is that no one here is receptive to my point of view so I should gently move on. [[User:Qgobo|Qgobo]] 23:51, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
[[Faith]] is a uniquely Christian concept. It is being used incorrectly above.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:10, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Jews, Hindus, Muslims would be interested to know that. --[[User:KimSell|KimSell]] 10:22, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:: Aschlafly - please read "people of faith" in the above comments to mean "non-atheists". {{unsigned|Qgobo}}<br />
<br />
::: That's a meaningless category. It's like making a category of all voters whose last name begins with "A". They disagree among themselves.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 00:03, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Not true - this article is about how atheists bias wikipedia. Thus, comparison with the group “Non-atheist” is not arbitrary selection at all. It is the logical selection of the group of people on wikipedia who are not atheists i.e. the opposite group to the atheist group. <br />
<br />
:::: I believe what you really dislike about my point is that christians have been lumped-in with the other faith groups! If this is your point then forget the atheist and focus on the “non-christians” on wikipedia as a group, then you can see the christians are sorely out-numbered and that wikipedia is blatantly anti-christian website (despite being the largest <s>faith</s> {non- atheists} group on it). <br />
<br />
:::: Also, if you do not view the “other faith groups” as proper “faith groups” why are they even on your chart? Why not have “christians vs atheist” or “christians vs non-christians” . Either of these would seem more logical based on your statements above. - [[User:Qgobo|Qgobo]] 00:33, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
The meaning of "faith" is something on which I disagree with Andy. So my answer is that you can't divide the groups into "faith" and "non-faith". They ''all'' have faith: Atheists have faith that God doesn't exist.<br />
<br />
Further, the group "non-Atheist" is just as arbitrary as "non-Christian", "non-Muslim", "non-Jewish", etc.<br />
<br />
The claim that "wikipedia is less bias[ed] than conservapedia" is a very doubtful one, given that it treats the atheistic view of origins as fact and the biblical view as pseudoscience.<br />
<br />
Qgobo's comment that we don't want the encyclopedia dominated by one faith falsely presumes that the one faith is not the correct one.<br />
<br />
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:27, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Very well put, Philip, without conceding your broader definition of [[faith]]. Your observation is insightful given your broader definition.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:52, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention that American atheists give significantly less to charity than American theists on a per capita basis.[11] <br />
<br />
doesn't this seem like a moot point simply because of the number difference does the wikipedia article mention that in the more atheistic countries it's the opposite?<br />
<br />
== People for the American Way ==<br />
<br />
Granted that Wikipedia does not use the word "liberal" when describing People for the American Way, but it also does not use the word "conservative" when describing the National Right to Life Committee. Wikipedia's conservative bias perhaps? [[User:Blinkadyblink|Blinkadyblink]] 23:33, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: That does look biased. Good catch, except realize Wikipedia editors think "conservative" is pejorative term.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:45, 9 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
::Good thing this site shows it's better by not simply inverting that. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 01:28, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Why some of these problems don't count==<br />
Biases such as a lack of Biography on conservatives, here is the soltion. ADD THEM! An expert (presumably a conservative) has to write the article. There are more bios on Liberals because there are more people writing about them. Seperating to another website will not encourage what you believe to be true! It means that conservatives and Liberals stay wrong about things. Go and add the Bio, don't write it here!<br />
<br />
Number 50. Dismisses the banner saying that an article doesn't represent a world view, and you argue that there is no world view. By your own admission, there is no one view that represents all people of the world. Due to this, it would be necessary to tell people when something is Western centric, or American Centric. An article on Gun law, for example, could not be reliable from an American view because (unlike many countries) guns are supported in the constitution. 50 isa contradiction.<br />
<br />
{{unsigned|Margheritapizza}}<br />
<br />
: No, you're wrong. Adding a biography on a conservative can result in its deletion or redirect by the [[Wikipedia police]], even though [[Wikipedia]] has thousands of entries about obscure liberals.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:12, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::I've read your article on the wikipedia police, and I wonder why there isn't an article on the conservapedia police because it seems like there are around 5 people on conservapedia who do everything. [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 22:04, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::Regarding deletion of bios of conservative people: If you can back up your biography with plenty of sources independent of the subject, then the "police" will approve. For more check out Wikipedia's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people) notability guideline for people]. Notability trumps any ideology, liberal, conservative, moderate, libertarian, radical, you-name-it. --[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 19:38, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::Wikipedia does not follow its own policies. If wikipedia was actually neutral, why would it delete the page for Al Gore III [http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=Uncensored:Al_Gore_III] while keeping the page for Mary Cheney [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Cheney]? [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 20:59, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::Regarding Al Gore III: the article was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Al_Gore_III_(8th_nomination) deleted in February 2008] after Wikipedians decided that they just couldn't write a biography of him that met the "biographies of living persons" and "notability (people)" standards. If you actually read the Wikitruth archived version you provided, you'll probably find out that it's full of gossip and doesn't explain ''why'' he's relevant to the world beyond being given his 15 news headlines of fame due to minor injuries and run-ins with the law. Furthermore, WP's people notability page states that "notability is not inherited" - in other words just because a certain person meets WP's notability standard doesn't mean that his/her friends, relatives, or associates are as well. Among all the sources cited in that "article", the sources that focus on him are about his legal run-ins, and the less distressing sources have him not as the focus of the article.<br />
:::::On the other hand regarding Mary Cheney: the article does assert that she is relevant to society, as she has worked for Coors (one of the most prominent beer breweries in America) and the Bush/Cheney 2004 campaign, and her "marriage" has been a subject of much debate in the news media given VP Cheney's opposition to same-sex marriage. She also wrote an autobiography that was published in 2006.<br />
:::::Thus, WP deleted the Al Gore III article but kept the Mary Cheney article because Cheney is so much more noted and discussed in the media than AG3 has been. BTW, I'll go on WP later and expand on AG3 on the Al Gore article.--[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 19:56, 30 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==WP: Sexist?==<br />
Wh...what? How does that prove anything? Then again, it IS pretty much on-par with the rest of the petty claims on the page... [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 17:12, 10 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Reversion==<br />
I looked up WPs Hamas article, and it describes them as a militant organization, with the rider that the US state dept etc etc as per the linked claim. [[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|Fox]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 18:40, 12 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Partially true; to quote the article: "Hamas was created in 1987 by the terrorist Sheikh Ahmed Yassin." More to the point, Wikipedia's article on Al-Qaeda directly calls it a terrorist organization with no peddle-footing around. Therefore, the cited quote is still false in that it specifically says Wikipedia does not call Al-Qaeda a terrorist organization. The quote is false and should be removed. [[User:Deweyman|Deweyman]] 23:05, 12 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
::Scratch that. The "Hamas was created in 1987 by the terrorist Sheikh Ahmed Yassin" quote was just added by an IP address today and could possibly be reverted. However, the Isreali Media quote is still wrong due to the Al-Qaeda issue, as much as I agree of Wikipedia's bias. [[User:Deweyman|Deweyman]] 23:13, 12 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::I removed the article again today. If someone were to look up Wikipedia's Al-Qaeda article and discover that we were perpetuating false information, it would damage our credibility. The truth alone is an incredibly strong case against Wikipedia, so we don't need to give anyone reason to believe otherwise. [[User:Deweyman|Deweyman]] 22:04, 16 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: You deleted an accurate quotation of an observation that is substantially true. In the Al-Qaeda entry on Wikipedia that you cite as a counter-example, Wikipedia uses the term "militant" repeatedly to describe the organization and only uses the term "terrorist" in the context of official government descriptions of the organization.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:54, 16 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::Respectfully, the first sentence of wikipedia's article is ''"Al Qaeda is an international alliance of Islamic militant terrorist organizations founded in 1988."'' Then, yes, it goes on to list the nations that consider it a terrorist organization. It should also be noted that it describes its attacks as "terrorist attacks". [[User:Deweyman|Deweyman]] 17:36, 18 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==43==<br />
Ad hominem against atheists on Number 43. And don't attack me as being a devil worshipper/satanist/atheist: I'm catholic. [[User:Mwaetht|Mwaetht]] 13:53, 23 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
P.S. On 49: Ever hear of Project Steve?<br />
: How is No. 33 an ''ad hominem'' argument? An ''ad hominem'' argument is where you attack the person rather than their argument. No. 43 is not attacking atheists; it's attacking Wikipedia's treatment of atheism.<br />
: And "Ever hear of Project Steve?" (yes I have; so what?) is not a refutation of anything.<br />
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:28, 25 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Smoking example ==<br />
<br />
I'm confused about the smoking example that you just added. Is the implication meant to be that smoking isn't dangerous? [[User:DanH|DanH]] 16:02, 23 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Yes, I take it from Ted's edit that Wikipedia wants to downplay the dangers of smoking. Could be tobacco industry types editing on Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:07, 23 March 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Moved from being inappropriately put in a user's personal talk page ==<br />
<br />
== Question ==<br />
<br />
Hello. I'm a long time wikipedia editor, and as such am fairly insulted at your harsh criticism of wikipeda. On the allegations of bias...since conservapedia openly admits being conservatively biased, doesn't that make it even worse than wikipedia? Not that Wikipedia is biased...how can an encyclopedia anyone can edit be biased? [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 01:25, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
And as far as your criticisms of Wikipedia's scope and content...isn't having a larger scope better? Also, you criticized it for having pornographic images and articles. That is true, but isn't it better to have articles that describe things such as pornography and other non-child friendly things in an accurate way? Or is it better to pretend they don't exist? [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 01:29, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
: My [[Essay: Accuracy vs. neutrality on Conservapedia]] goes part way to answering your questions. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:36, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I still vehemently disagree about Wikipedia's bias. Anyone can edit Wikipeda, and thus, as long as the change is not biased, it will not be reverted. There is no "ruling class" on Wikipedia--all editors are equal to the others. [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 10:32, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
:From personal experience, I can vouch for that not being the case. For example, see the Intelligent Design article (my comments relate to around January/February 2007, which I last seriously looked at it). It was not an article ''about'' Intelligent Design, but an article about why Intelligent Design was wrong. And ''numerous'' editors either tried changing it or discussing changes on the talk pages, only to have their changes reversed, their discussions shouted down, themselves called trolls and various other names, and generally grilled and harassed to the point that they either left or blew their stack, giving the controlling editors, which included sysops, the excuse to block them. It truly was a mobocracy. I found similar control existed over all articles to do with creationism. I was never blocked on Wikipedia, but I left active editing because of the oppressive regime active in those sorts of articles. See my [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philip_J._Rayment Wikipedia user page] for more detail. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:47, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Well, remember what neutrality is. Neutrality does '''not''' mean "give both sides equal weight", it means "give both sides equal weight according to the strength of their argument". [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 10:52, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
: In other words, if a majority of editors consider that the strength of the anti-ID argument is greater than the strength of the pro-ID argument, then an article supposedly ''about'' Intelligent Design can have an anti-ID stance. In which case, it comes down to the number of anti-ID editors vs. the number of pro-ID editors, which is ''not'' neutrality, but majority rule. Secondly, your definition is self-contradictory. "according to the strength of their argument" means "give the side with the stronger argument more weight", which is the opposite of "give both sides equal weight". And finally, giving the stronger argument more weight may (in principle) be ''fair'', but it's hardly ''neutral''. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:00, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
You misunderstand me. What I mean is that the article takes a critical look at ID because of the overwhelming number of qualified scientists who are opposed to it, compared to those who favor it. In this case, neutrality does not mean give both sides equal weight in the article, it means give the side that has more reliable sources supporting it the greater coverage. [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 11:30, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: There is no evidence that "overwhelming number of qualified scientists ... are opposed" to ID. Moreover, it's a meaningless statistic anyway; 30 years ago an "overwhelming number of qualified scientists" insisted that there was life in outer space. By relying on this approach, you have illustrated an example of point 11 of [[liberal style]]: overreliance on [[hearsay]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:03, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Most scientists believed there was life in outer space? Have any proof for that statement? Sounds like you are being a good liberal and relying on hearsay!--[[User:Mathewson|Mathewson]] 12:06, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Mathewson, I'm afraid you're clueless. Please stick around here and learn some things '''with an open mind'''. It's common knowledge that a generation ago scientists overwhelmingly believed in life in outer space. See, e.g., [[Exobiology]]. Rest assured I was not ''relying'' on what a majority of scientists reportedly believed. You are.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:40, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::No, my friend, I am far from clueless. You made the claim that an ""overwhelming number of qualified scientists" insisted that there was life in outer space." Can you provide any cites proving that this statement is correct?--[[User:Mathewson|Mathewson]] 12:49, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Life in space has been neither proven nor disproven; and for that matter, it can't be disproven since the universe is theoretically (or at least practically) infinite in size. It could only be proven, and only then by finding life in space. But that is besides the point. Any encyclopedia should strive to provide its readers with the most accurate and up-to-date information from people who actually know what they're talking about. As such, Wikipedia is right in down-playing the supporters of ID...because there are very few reputable ones. if you have any examples of reputable supporters of ID, please tell me. [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 12:51, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Folks, I'm not going to allow the repetition of [[liberal]] falsehoods on my own talk page. Please illustrate point 11 of [[liberal style]] somewhere else. In response to Mathewson above, I did provide a cite, and am not confident he read it with an open mind.<br />
<br />
: Further attempts at [[liberal]] [[last wordism]] on my personal talk page may result in a short block of the offending account.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:04, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Translation: "It's my website, so I get the last word." (Go ahead and reply to this one, Andy. I just wanted to point out the blatant hypocrisy here.) --[[User:Gulik5|Gulik5]] 14:54, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Gulik5, you're clueless also. We've always had a policy of respect on Conservapedia for everyone's talk page, in contrast with [[Wikipedia]]. See point 11 in [[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]]. Insist on [[last wordism]] on my talk page and you'll then see an example of an account being blocked for violating this principle.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:01, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I wasn't aware I was trying to get the last word, I thought we were having a conversation. [[User:TheNobleSith|TheNobleSith]] 16:32, 5 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Maths, anyone? ==<br />
<br />
''"Wikipedia asserts that "One 1987 estimate found that more than 99.84% of almost 500,000 US scientists in the earth and life sciences supported evolution over creation science."[76] This statement is false, but Wikipedians won't correct it and it has been repeated thousands of times by other liberals in reliance on Wikipedia.[77] The truth is that 700 scientists signed a statement rejecting evolution, but evolutionists then made the illogical claim that every other scientist must support evolution.[78] Under that reasoning, if 1000 persons signed a statement opposing President George W. Bush, then nearly 300 million Americans must support him! Funny how Wikipedia does not claim that."''<br />
<br />
700 out of 500,000 expressed as a percentage is 0.0014%. That is, by your figures, 99.9986% - more than the much maligned estimate gave. Can someone please tell me what the point of the '700 scientists' comment was, if it only serves to destroy your own arguments?<br />
<br />
Also, the figures are more closer to 7% religious.<br />
<br />
- http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html<br />
<br />
--[[User:Tommy|Tommy]] 21:58, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Tommy, your objection is not clear and you seem to be missing the flaw in Wikipedia's biased claim. Your point about the religious seems completely unrelated to your other point. Be clear, and I'll respond, but demonstrate that understand the flaw in Wikipedia's analysis or else I may not waste my time.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:21, 8 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
It should be made clear what "reject evolution" means, or this debate is kind of pointless. I'm also not sure why the 'religious' comment and the link are relevant. I think the key to that objection what the first percentage, indicating that 0.0014% of scientists definitely "reject evolution". By the way, it should actually be 0.14%; 700 / 500,000 = 0.0014, but you must multiply by 100 to get the percentage. Either way, the figure is small. Aschafly is correct that assuming that ''all'' other scientists (the remaining 99.84%) "support evolution" (which doesn't mean any more than "reject evolution" does) is not necessarily valid, but as a student who knows and has spoken at length with many scientists and professors on a variety of issues, I would consider it fair to assume that ''most'' scientists have some conviction about the correctness and utility of our current theories on evolution. It is not nearly so black-and-white an issue as simply "supporting" or "rejecting" evolution. Is this covered in one of the points on this article? This probably should be changed on Wikipedia, if only because it sounds to me like this poll was conducted in improperly simplified terms. I'll look for it. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 10:06, 26 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I've looked into this reference on Wikipedia, in their [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution Level of support for evolution] article in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_of_support_for_evolution#Scientific_support Scientific support] section. Due to the subtleties involved in this debate, I would still like to know more about how the poll discussed there was conducted. I did find a lively debate over the validity of using this poll in the article in the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Level_of_support_for_evolution/Archive_3#Newsweek_article article's 3rd and most recent talk page archive]. There did not appear to be a consensus. If it makes any of you feel better, consider the context of this poll and remember that it was conducted in 1987 and appears to have used blunt, oversimplified questions. It's more of a historical reference than a current item now. Either way, the debate goes on. <br />
<br />
By the way, I'm curious to know if any of you can direct me to any papers published in peer-reviewed journals that presented data or explained experiments whose results clearly supported Intelligent Design. I've read about ID supporters' thought experiments and probability-based arguments, but I don't know anything about their supporting data or experimental evidence. If any of you know where I can find papers on this data and evidence, let me know. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 11:01, 26 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Obvious bias in liberal page ==<br />
Did anybody else notice that in the "See Also" section for [[Liberal]], there are a ton of links, with most of them being negative (to the point of extremity and nitpickiness such as [[Liberal celebrity obsession]] or [[Liberal Myths]]), while the same section for [[Conservative]] has only three links, none of them which are remotely negative? <br />
<br />
--[[User:Blabberno|Blabberno]] 21:13, 14 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Administrator names? Huh?==<br />
<br />
This article makes the claim that Wikipedia harbors an anti-intellectual bias because of the fact that the site has many users with "silly administrator names", uhm, excuse me, but it also makes the claim all over this page that there are far too many examples of pages being "complicated" or information about people being "buried" within lengthy articles. I don't have any problem with this page at all, and I appreciate ''what'' it's trying to say, but I have to take issue with ''how'' its said. It's irresponsible and misleading to say that the little tags accompanying edits on Wikipedia are somehow a vanguard of idiocy but then to say that Wikipedia is being deceptive because it doesn't follow (or, speaking chronologically, because it didn't ''create'') the Conservapedia model of referring to politicians in cherry-picked Fortune Cookie-size snippets according to subjective information and some stray quote. It's hardly a stretch to say that a Congressman or activist or other such notable figure being referred to as being "...a [[liberal]] [[Socialist]] [[secular]]-[[Progressivism|progressive]] who once referred to [[Christianity]] as a charade" (or some other such marginalization) would be difficult to find on Conservapedia. Basically, if this articles going to attack Wikipedia for being a flip-flopping, contradictory, biased Gemorrah, then let's please not turn around and do these EXACT same things on very page where we claim these things about them. Just a thought (as with most things here...). [[User:LinusWilson|LinusWilson]] 14:20, 26 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I concur. --[[User:StevenM|Steve]] 14:23, 26 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Replying to Linus above, there is nothing contradictory about:<br />
<br />
* criticizing anti-intellectual user names<br />
* criticizing long-winded, wordy entries filled with trivial and weak on substance<br />
<br />
: That's Wikipedia in a nutshell. It tells you everything except what you need to know, just like the National Enquirer. And Wikipedia gives that juice from the hands of anti-intellectual contributors who think it's funny to be dumb.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:33, 26 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Huh?--[[User:Faizaguo|Faizaguo]] 17:00, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Peter Singer==<br />
New to this site. Check out the article on Peter Singer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Singer, particularly well known for his belief in infanticide. The article makes little mention of his views, and the section purporting to include the ideas reads like an advertisement for his book. An excerpt from one of his books can be found at http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1993----.htm [[User:Egd|Egd]] 13:35, 27 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
* Quotes such as '''Simply killing an infant is never equivalent to killing a person''' were ''removed'' as being POV<br />
<br />
:Wikipedia policy: "It is inappropriate to remove blocks of well-referenced information which is germane to the subject from articles on the grounds that the information advances a point of view." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy/Precedents#Deleted_content] But this is disregarded by POV-pushers. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 11:59, 30 April 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Question of Logic ==<br />
<br />
The underlying grammar of this page (at least) is "wikipedia this" and "wikipedia that" as if it were a hive mind, monolithic and single-minded. While the examination of the religion templates of registered Wikipedia users ("Wikipedians", whatever) approaches laudability, the conscious choice to treat it, its articles, and its users as a single static unit rather than one made up of self-selecting communities (with particular categories of articles dominated by particular communities of users) does nothing for your credibility among those who disagree with this website or, ultimately, its political goals. Self-isolation and the creation of an "us vs. them" mentality (among other approaches of this site) just make this //look// like its users are stereotypically smug, self-righteous, hypocritical conservatives working on a "propaganda source" instead of an honestly self-critical attempt at a no-nonsense examination of the world. <br /> <br />
<br /><br />
To be clear, I am neither conservative nor liberal (my views on foreign policy tend to agree more with 'hawks', my economics more technical than political, my social/civil views classically liberal, and my historical/teleological views loosely extropian). I agree there is some degree of 'liberal' (as nebulous as that word is) bias among Wikipedia's editing communities, but I also think '''this''' community's notion of 'balance' is ridiculous. As well, I believe it is politically ineffective beyond 1) preaching to the proverbial choir and 2) reinforcing stereotypes of conservatives - how 'they' think and view others. If those are truly the goals of Conservapedians, then good luck and happy editing. [[User:Zebu1911|Zebu1911]] 23:17, 1 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Creation "myth" ==<br />
Im only going to say this from a neutral standpoint all stories of creation are myth this is the definition of myth {{unsigned|Cal05000}}<br />
<br />
: Wikipedia is redefining words to advance its [[liberal]] agenda.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:59, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::What does wikipedia define myth as, and what is myth defined as? [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 18:02, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Wikipedia does specify that the definition of "myth" is just a traditional story with no implications of truth or un-truth. I can confirm definition this in several dictionaries. [[User:Hpesoj|Hpesoj]] 20:56, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: The word "myth" plainly connotes falsity, which is what the [[liberals]] on Wikipedia want to connote about [[creation]]. See [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/myth Webster definition]. {{unsigned|Aschlafly}}<br />
<br />
::::: Aschlafly you should sign your posts. And if you read the beginning of the article you can see that the author of the article goes out of their way to define myth. The article is about creation stories, including every major religion. Not just christianity. I fail to see your problem with this. But realizing no matter what I say you will never change your opinion, or for that matter admit you were wrong. So feel free to not comment back. [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 22:07, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
You are both right. "Myth" does not imply truth or falsity ''when used in a scholarly sense''. The Merriam-Webster definition 1 (see Aschlafly's link) reflects this. But when used in an everyday sense, it implies something that is not true, as per Merriam-Webster definitions 2b and 3. Wikipedia uses the first definition as an excuse to tar creation accounts as unreliable, but contrary to your claim about "every major religion. Not just christianity", does not include atheism and apply the term to its origins account. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:40, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Great points, Philip. In sum, Wikipedia's [[liberal]] and [[atheistic]] bias is demonstrated by how it applies the term "myth" to [[creation]] but not to [[evolution]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:52, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: I completely agree that the word "myth" carries connotations of falsity, and for a while I was of the opinion that the title in question was not NPOV, but after reading the arguments on Wikipedia, there are several definitions of the word which do not define a myth as either true or false, which describe the topic in hand far more accurately than something like "story" or "belief". Here are some examples of the '''primary''' definitions from the first 4 dictionary websites I found:<br />
<br />
::*''"a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, esp. one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature."'' ([http://www.dictionary.com])<br />
::*''"an ancient story or set of stories, especially explaining in a literary way the early history of a group of people or about natural events and facts"'' ([http://dictionary.cambridge.org])<br />
::*''"a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon"'' ([http://www.merriam-webster.com])<br />
::*''"ancient story: a traditional story about heroes or supernatural beings, often attempting to explain the origins of natural phenomena or aspects of human behavior"'' ([http://encarta.msn.com])<br />
<br />
::In my opinion, the definition of the word "myth" is perfectly inline with the definition of Creationism, while it doesn't describe recent scientific theories like the Big Bang and the theory of evolution. The fact that the article clearly explains that it is using the strictly academic definition of the word makes it an acceptable title, and I don't think a more vague, politically correct word is needed. [[User:Hpesoj|Hpesoj]] 22:58, 8 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: [[Wikipedia]] is a good home for you then. You selectively quote from the dictionary definitions about myth and then, once you settle on a misleading meaning, you apply it in a biased way against creation but not evolution. You've illustrated and embraced the bias at Wikipedia well. Enjoy it there. We don't allow such bias here on our content pages.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:04, 8 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::I did not selectively quote dictionary definitions, I clearly stated that I chose the '''primary''' definitions from the first 4 (and, in fact, only) dictionary websites that I looked at (typed "dictionary" into google and chose from the first page of results). I acknowledged that "myth" carries negative connotations, and that at first I felt that the title did need to be changed. However, I felt after consideration, that due to word (or at least the primary definition of the word) being far more descriptive of the topic at hand than other potential replacements, along with the definition of the word within the article itself, it was better to keep the title than to change it because of the connotations it carries. This is of course my opinion, and is based on my view of how negative the word "myth" is. Others are likely to have different perceptions, and thus disagree with me.<br />
<br />
::::The other main definition of "myth" seems to be ''"false belief: a widely held but mistaken belief"'' (encarta). Both Evolution and Creationism could fall under this description, depending on your POV/bias. Evolution however, in my opinion, does not fall under the other definition, as it is in no way "traditional", "supernatural", "historical" or has anything to do with "deities", whereas Creationism does (if you disagree I would be happy to hear your points).<br />
<br />
::::I do not support any form of bias in this context, and agree with Conservapedia that there is significant bias throughout Wikipedia that needs to be amended. I hope that I have cleared up my views on the matter. [[User:Hpesoj|Hpesoj]] 00:19, 9 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::: Evolution wasn't invented by Darwin. He merely popularised it by giving it a pseudo-scientific explanation. The general idea of evolution is ancient, so it ''does'' fit some of the definitions you provided (note that reference to a deity was not in all definitions, and not a requirement in others). [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:43, 9 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Wikipedia obviously cant say it isnt a myth either so how you put it?<br />
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 23:54, 5 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Philip you make a good point, but you have one flaw in your logic. The purpose of an encyclopedia is the present factual information based on the official definitions. Yes, popular and actual definitions are often at odds, but encylopedias present the actual definition. I disagree that a evolutionist/atheistic view of creation should be added. The page is about religious creation myths, and it does include a link to the article on evolution. [[User:Rellik|Rellik]] 13:54, 6 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
: I'm not aware that anyone has decreed that encyclopedias can only use "official" definitions.<br />
: If the page is about ''religious'' creation myths, then why exclude the "creation myth" of atheistic religions? This is part of the atheist agenda: Label everyone else's worldviews/beliefs as "religious", but their own as "non-religious" or "rational" or whatever, and label everyone else's beliefs about origins as "creation myths" but their own as "scientific". Such artificial self-serving distinctions are not accepted on Conservapedia. Granted, Wikipedia does define how it is using the term "myth" in that particular article, but, as pointed out, does not include the atheistic origins myth. Further, at the top of the page are links to "scientific" views, a non-so-subtle inference that the "creation myths" are not scientific.<br />
: And the only link to evolution ''per se'' is buried within the "Hermeticism" section half way through the page.<br />
: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 06:02, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
While that may be so Philip I think it prudent to mention that many links on this website either redirect to another conservapedia page, are missing altogether or are linked to a page that says nothing in regards to the intended point.<br />
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 06:15, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
: I'm sorry, but I have no idea how that relates to the discussion. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:11, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Well, you said the only link to evolution in wikipedia when discussing the 'creation myth' was buried ''per se'' (in what I gather) rather obscurely. I was pointing out that many CP links demonstrate this also, if not worse.<br />
[[User:AdenJ|AdenJ]] 08:23, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
: My ''criticism'' was that Wikipedia treats creation but not evolution as a "myth". My reference to an evolution link was simply a reply to your claim that the Wikipedia article did link to evolution. It does, but not in any way that could be construed as including evolution as a "creation myth". [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:50, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Has anyone else noticed the further evidence of systemic bias in the Wikipedia Creation myth page? "Some Jews and Christians believe that in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Every other subsection starts without such a qualifier:<br />
* "The Aztec narrative describing creation proceeds with..."<br />
* "In the beginning, there was just water..." (Cherokee)<br />
* "The god Izanagi and goddess Izanami churned the ocean..." (Shinto)<br />
* "The Voluspa opens with the Norse account of the creation of the present universe :"<br />
Wikipedia insists on qualifying every statement regarding Christianity to suggest that those who believe in the Bible, or in this case that Genesis is the Christian story of creation, are offshoots of the mainstream. [[User:Egd|Egd]] 10:31, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Right. The hostility and bias on Wikipedia against Christianity are undeniable.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:33, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
: Yes, I've seen that sort of thing before, although probably not that particular example. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 12:22, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Also wikipedia has a categories for alleged Christian mythology and Jewish mythology --<span style="margin-top: -3px;">&nbsp;[[Image:50 star flag.png|12px]]</span><span style="position:relative; overflow:hidden; width:88px; height:15px; z-index:2;"> [[User:Deborah|Deborah]] [[Special:Contributions/Deborah|<font color="gray">(contributions)</font>]] [[User_talk:Deborah|<font color="darkslategray">(talk)</font>]]</span> 12:23, 7 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I just removed a 'bias' example regarding the Wikipedia article "Creation myth" because it talks about myths from all sorts of religions and cultures. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 15:17, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Categorization ==<br />
<br />
Would anyone object to an effort to categorize the examples in different sections, such as Wikipedia attacks on religion, Wikipedia pro-liberal bias, examples that have been corrected and so on? [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 22:26, 14 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: That's OK, provided it does not dilute the entry or introduce [[placement bias]] by moving stronger and more recent points lower in the page.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:54, 14 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== #12: Ron Paul smear ==<br />
<br />
As a huge Ron Paul supporter, #12 sent me to straight to wikipedia in hopes of setting things straight, only to find that the article clearly shows that the comments were not made by Ron Paul. I fail to see the smear here. -[[User:Crimson30|Crimson30]] 14:33, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Why is the smear so extensive on Ron Paul's entry given that, as you say, he did not author the comments? When the entry is about a [[liberal]], Wikipedia does not smear the person in such a manner. Hence this illustrates Wikipedia's bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:04, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: How is the entry in the Wikipedia article a smear? It's responsible of the article to mention the controversy over the newsletters given the widespread coverage it has in anti-Paul propaganda online, and the article clearly states that Ron Paul is not the source of those comments and that they are not his beliefs. If there was a Wikipedia article about you, and there was a widespread story on the internet that falsely attributed Holocaust denial remarks to you, would you think Wikipedia worse for noting this story and refuting it? [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 15:42, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Wikipedia is like the National Enquirer, then, in simply repeating smears about people without any educational value.<br />
<br />
::: But the reason the point is here, as I said, is because Wikipedia does NOT smear liberals as it smears conservatives.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:07, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: But it *does* have educational value - it informs people that Ron Paul did not write those things, does not believe those things and that he finds what was written morally reprehensible. It's not a smear, because it presents the facts of the matter. And if it's not a smear, the point has to be made with a different article. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 17:28, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::: "Wandering", it obviously is a smear. If you can't admit that, then this discussion is a waste of time. Ron Paul's opponents used that information to attack and smear him. Enough said.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:15, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: They cannot use that information to smear him, because the information directly indicates that it is not smear-worthy material. The information clearly shows that Ron Paul did not write and in fact repudiates the controversial content from the newsletters. I'm beginning to wonder if you've actually read that portion of the article word-for-word, instead of just skimming it. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 18:52, 22 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Points #1, #4 == <br />
<br />
I do not see how the image of the minuteman statue is presented as "proof" (although the caption is admittedly quite poor). On the point of the two articles concerning religious terrorism, "body" seems somewhat of a misnomer, since the articles are not essays. Regardless, reference link 6 is broken. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 22:03, 23 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Defamatory material in American Family Association article ==<br />
<br />
Wikipedia's article for the group includes numerous defamatory assertions which are either unsupported or poorly supported (e.g. with biased references). For example, the article claims the AFA supports "the criminalization of homosexuality," yet neither source supports such a blanket assertion (one of the sources actually says the AFA supports criminalizing ''public displays'' of homosexuality). Another example, the article states, "The March 2005 issue of the AFA's Journal contained an article which insinuated that raising children as Jews would lead to criminal lifestyles, and that it required a conversion to Christianity in order to make them productive members of society," yet the article in question makes absolutely no such insinuation. Wikipedia also categorizes the article under "Homophobia" even though phobias are disorders requiring a clinical diagnosis to identify. Attempts to correct material within the article are met with vicious and unrelenting opposition by homosexual and pro-homosexual editors. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 20:03, 30 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Check out the recent edit history. WP editor (who is gay, unsurprisingly enough) is reverting my properly rationalized edits for no good reason. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 21:12, 30 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: The Wikipedia entry does misrepresent what the [[American Family Association]] article says, probably in a misguided attempt to smear the [[American Family Association]]. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=American_Family_Association&diff=216091906&oldid=216091846] Let's see how long Wikipedia persists in its misrepresentation.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:36, 30 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::I have to admit that there was a show of bias on the part of WP editors, or to be more precise two of them. If you follow guidelines like I did and initiate discussion rather than just engaging in all out edit wars you will find that the greater community is more than willing to listen. Try doing that next time, the talk page is there for a reason. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 20:59, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: I don't see any improvement. Illustrating its bias, [[Wikipedia]] simply reverted or overwrote the corrections in order to continue to smear the [[American Family Association]]. The [[Wikipedia]] entry even resorts to smearing the [[American Family Association]] for something it did not even write in one of the widely read textbooks of all time. Contrast that with how [[Wikipedia]] does not criticize John Scopes and the [[ACLU]] for defending the [[racist]] textbook at issue in the [[Scopes trial]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:57, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Look closer, if you have any problems with the current article perhaps you could list them here and we could see if we can try to fix them. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 23:07, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: It's essentially the same as when I (and Jinxmchue) complained. The Wikipedia entry is a complete hatchet job. No, I'm not going to waste all night on this. The [[anti-conservatives]] running [[Wikipedia]] will revert any corrections to this entry. This is a determined smear by Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:12, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::Well the thing is Jinx didn't complain, he engaged in an edit war. Just list a couple of things here and we'll see if we can't get them changed. If they aren't then that's that, if they are then we can start working on other problems with the article. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 23:19, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::Edit war. Mm-hmm. Yeah, no one else there was involved in any edit war. Nope. They can revert edits they don't like without any sort of attempt to address issues, get their friends involved to subvert the three revert rule, but they aren't ever accused of starting edit wars. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 23:29, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::I didn't say the others weren't also involved in an edit war, obviously you would need two sides to do it. However, if you observe what I did (discussed, rather than continually revert and get blocked for it) you will see that I achieved my goal (as stated on the article's talk page). Now, give me something else wrong with the article and we will see if we can change it. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 23:31, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::If you want to see what I did, check the edit history for AFA's article over there. There's absolutely no legitimate reason for my edits being reverted. There's just a couple of AFA-hating gay editors who want the article to be a hit piece. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 23:32, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<- Yes there were a couple of anti-AFA editors who chose to revert the article, and if you look closely they also got blocked for it (one has since left). If you did what I did and tried to initiate discussion on the article's talk page you would not have gotten blocked, and others would have come to your assistance, as they came to mine. The AFA article has also been reported to ANI/NPOV for further assessment of bias against the organisation. Now, if you or Andy would care to give me another problem with the article then we will see if we can get that changed too. [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 23:36, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: We did. See the first and fifth paragraphs above. Those smears are still in the Wikipedia entry about the [[American Family Association]] despite the high-level review that you apparently initiated, and despite Wikipedia not smearing liberals like that. If AFA supported the [[homosexual agenda]] rather than opposing it, then you can be sure that Wikipedia would have a very different and favorable entry about it. So, the bottom line is clear: this is yet another example of bias at Wikipedia, and it's not likely to change.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:28, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:I am making some corrections now. We will see if the one remaining gay editor who wants to control the page will leave them be. I doubt it, but then years of experience with such people have turned me into a cynic. Perhaps I will be pleasantly surprised. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 22:31, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::My cynicism was well-founded. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 11:20, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Point #44 re: Association of American Physicians and Surgeons ==<br />
<br />
The reader who submitted this comment claims that it was "guilt by association" to repeat "a 40 year old newspaper claim that some of its leaders once belonged to the JBS." <br />
<br />
However, the factual basis for associating AAPS with the John Birch Society is much stronger than a mere "newspaper claim". For example: in the early 1960's, the AAPS Board of Directors included Dr. Granville Knight (a JBS National Council member), Dr. Charles W. Pavey (a JBS member),Dr. James L. Doenges (a JBS endorser) and Dr. George J. Hess (a JBS member who was AAPS President in 1962). <br />
<br />
Furthermore, AAPS annual conventions featured speakers and exhibitors which were recommended by the the JBS in its own literature. In fact, the exhibitors often were organizations that were created or led by JBS members, endorsers and sympathizers -- including, for example, Southern States Industrial Council, National Education Program, National Committee For Economic Freedom, and American Opinion magazine (the JBS magazine!). AAPS described these organizations as "freedom organizations". Speakers at AAPS conventions included prominent JBS members and sympathizers such as JBS National Council member Revilo P. Oliver.<br />
<br />
Incidentally, senior FBI officials (including Director J. Edgar Hoover, FBI Division Chiefs, and Supervisors within its Domestic Intelligence Division) routinely referred to the JBS in FBI memos as "irrational", "extremist",<br />
"irresponsible", "fanatics", and "lunatic fringe". They did not describe the JBS as a "freedom organization".{{unsigned|Ernie1241}}<br />
<br />
: Your 40-year-old [[gossip]] is silly and unsupported. Communists, anarchists, criminals, etc., also belong to numerous organizations. Smearing through use of guilt-by-association is criticized by [[liberals]] and against official Wikipedia policy. So why this reliance on 40-year-old gossip against this organization? This selective smearing illustrates Wikipedia's bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:23, 31 May 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: : REPLY TO ASCHLAFLY: Not sure why you describe what I presented as "gossip". The details concerning JBS member connections to AAPS come from AAPS publications. Is that "gossip"? The info I provided regarding comments made by top FBI officials originate in FBI internal memos---all of which I have in my possession. Is that "gossip"? You can certainly disagree with their judgments -- but why misrepresent and de-value the quality of the data as nothing more than "gossip"? {{unsigned|Ernie1241}}<br />
<br />
::: You lack dates, sources or logic for your gossipy accusations. The accusations have no relevance today. Do you spread the same silly gossip about the Democratic Party, such as claiming that many KKK members were delegates at Democratic Party conventions a hundred years ago? No, Wikipedia only uses this silly smear campaign against conservative organizations. That's called bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:15, 24 July 2008 (EDT) <br />
<br />
With respect to your larger point (i.e. unsavory people belong to all sorts of organizations) -- yes, that's true but you conveniently ignore the salient difference i.e. such individuals did not represent the official position of those organizations nor were they knowingly embraced by such organizations. In fact, if "Communists, anarchists, criminals, etc." were identified -- most organizations would expel them. BY CONTRAST, AAPS enthusiastically welcomed JBS members and even invited them to be speakers and exhibitors at AAPS functions!<br />
:JBS itself doesn't deny that it's hired AAPS members. Examples include Nathaniel Adamson, Ray Clark, and Arthur Crino. [http://www.jbs.org/index.php/about/john-birch-society-national-council].--[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 22:40, 28 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Reversion explained ==<br />
<br />
The recent edits by [[User:Dnotice]] had an egregiously misspelled word, several inappropriate edits, and did not recognize that some Wikipedia improvements were after (and probably the result of) criticisms here. Some of the edits reverted had some value if presented properly. We welcome proper update of the points edited.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:12, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:"Egregiously misspelled"? "Inappropriate edits"? Which are you referring to? [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 14:29, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: Dnotice, you have this backwards. Please fix your own misspelling, and don't make as many potentially objectionable edits without discussing them here. OK?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:33, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::The whole idea of a Wikipedia-style website is that if a mistake is noticed, e.g. spelling, then the next user amends that error, instead of removing all of the previous user's edits on that page. Anyway, you didn't answer my question, which parts of my edits are are you specifically referring to? If I know which are incorrect or "potentially objectionable" on this site, I can ensure that future edits don't fall into that category. [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 14:46, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::As you've made amendments to my further edits, any chance of a response to my questions? [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 05:49, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Dnotice, you have to try harder first. Sorry, I wish I had the time to correct your mistakes, but I don't. In addition to an egregious misspelling, your edit to the point about Conservapedia being supportive of YEC was improper as it does not properly reference the prior version of the Wikipedia entry that illustrated the bias, and does not note how Wikipedia changed its entry in response to criticism here. Unless you fix your edit yourself, I will probably revert it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:09, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Is Conservapedia supportive of YEC? [[User:StatsMsn|StatsMsn]] 08:12, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: StatsMan, please read the relevant points in the entry first before asking questions that distract from the issue at hand, and then stick to the issue of how Wikipedia falsely portrayed Conservapedia in order to try to smear it in front of the Wikipedia audience.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:18, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::You didn't answer his question. [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 07:54, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::My edit took a direct quote from the link that was already in place. Anyway, it's odd that you've now decided to keep in my effective re-instatement of your deletion of this point... [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 11:38, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::: No, I'm hoping you'll fix your edit to reflect how Wikipedia changed its entry in response to criticism here. Will you?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:04, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::How could I show that? Especially when you don't deny what I said about my edit reflecting the what the quote actually said. With all respect, the previous edit was guilty of [[Quote mining|quote-mining]] as the Wikipedia article (even at that particular time) had a lot more than what this site portrayed it did. [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 07:54, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Criticism of Conservapedia "rare or non-existent"==<br />
Your suggestion that criticism of Conseravpedia "are rare or non-existent" seems blind to the day-to-day reality of Conservapedia. Criticism of your articles here features loudly on many, many Talk pages, much of it vandalism, yes, but much of it also well founded, well reasoned and intelligent criticism. And this is not just criticism based on ideology - this is often criticism of factual inaccuracy and misleading information. I think it's only fair to point this out in the interest of Fair Balance. [[User:StatsFan|StatsFan]] 22:29, 1 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: You misunderstood what your quote refers to, and falsely stated that the quote applies to all criticism. Of course many people who do not like the truth are going to criticize the truth, but that is not what the quote refers to.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:07, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: Correct me if I'm confused, but were you not referring to the sentence in the WP article which states "The site has come upon much criticism from those who have accused it of factual inaccuracies and bias"? [[User:StatsFan|StatsFan]] 11:10, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Right, but there are few or no criticisms of Conservapedia for "factual inaccuracies." The citation by Wikipedia for its claim is to a New York Times article that actually criticizes Wikipedia for harping on such a claim.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:02, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Belfast Agreement==<br />
Although both 'Belfast Agreement' and 'Good Friday Agreement' are used almost interchangeably, it has become common for Irish and UK people to refer to this agreement as 'Belfast Agreement'. Some references from major Irish news sources are listed here - [http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0527/breaking59.html], [http://www.rte.ie/news/1999/0408/north.html], [http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/dissecting-north-agreement--for-all-its-worth-363083.html]. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 19:27, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:But it is better known as "Good Friday Agreement" elsewhere. [[User:WilliamH|WilliamH]] 19:28, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::I am British and would say that use of 'the Good Friday Agreement' is far more common, in Great Britain at any rate. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 19:30, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::Where is the 'elsewhere' you refer to WilliamH? Even the Northern Ireland Office refers to it as both [http://www.nio.gov.uk/the-agreement]. I am Irish and would say 'Belfast Agreement' is much more commonly used on our island. I'm mostly curious to know why Wikipedia's use of one term over the other is considered 'bias' here? It reeks of grasping at straws, as it's perfectly appropriate to use either term. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 19:47, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::'Elsewhere' as in everywhere else outside Ireland or the UK. (I might have forgotten a few places or two, but the point stands.) [[User:WilliamH|WilliamH]] 20:12, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::::Well, I've removed the reference from the article, because while facts usually contain a 'liberal bias', I don't believe they're geographically biased. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 21:25, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::: Google shows that uses of "Good Friday Agreement" outnumber "Belfast Agreement" '''by more than a 3:1 ratio.''' It's irrelevant that Ireland newspapers prefer "Belfast Agreement" because Wikipedia does not ordinarily defer to an Irish point-of-view!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:52, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::: The popularity of a term "on Google" is simply not a metric on which to base an encyclopedia - if you go down the road of determining 'fact' based on Google cites, you're in deep trouble. The simple fact is, to those for whom the Agreement matters, both terms are interchangeable, and in fact Belfast Agreement is probably more commonly used. Finally, to use the choice of one term over the other as implying 'bias in Wikipeida' is to invent controversy where there is none, and in itself, biased - in this case, against Wikipedia, the editors of which can fairly choose to use whichever term they want. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 23:20, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::: An illustration of bias is how decisions that could go one way or the other (i.e., "interchangeable) are, in fact, always decided one way. In Wikipedia's case, that bias is against religion. Wikipedia censors religious references every time it can, and insisting on the unfamiliar "Belfast Agreement" rather that the more popular "Good Friday Agreement" is merely one of many examples. Alone it may not be significant, but with numerous other examples it reinforces the existence of the bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:38, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::: You are guilty of trying to foist a conspiracy theory into on an 'encyclopedia' article. Have you considered that those who would be most knowledgeable about the Belfast Agreement might, in fact, be from Ireland? And that therefore the Wikipedia articles may well be written by Irish editors? And that they may simply be using the term that is most familiar to them? And that the choice to not use the term containing a religious holiday reflects no "conspiracy against religion" as you have invented? Not everyone in the world is American, you know - in fact, Americans barely make up 5% of the world's population. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 23:46, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::::::::: Maybe there are more non-Americans in the world than Americans, but there definitely are more Americans in Wikipedia than Irishmen (plus, all the other english-speaking nationalities that don't call it 'Belfast Agreement') so bias is the most plausible explanation. [[User:WilliamH|WilliamH]] 23:50, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::::::::::: I take it you are certain that the proportion of Irish editors on the Wikipedia article is no higher than on, for example, an article about Alabama? [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 00:00, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::::::::: Some protestant groups in Northern Ireland do not celebrate Good Friday, preferring to observe the crucifixion on Wednesday, so the neutral term 'Belfast Agreement' gained favour in diplomatic circles in order to avoid suggestions of anti-protestant bias. [[User:Jalapeno|Jalapeno]] 23:52, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::::::::::: Exactly, Jalapeno. Thank you for pointing out the political sensitivities that those of us on this island take for granted, and foreigners are clueless about. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 23:58, 2 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::: Walter, you protest far too much, and now you have the fringe below even siding with you. Wikipedia editors are predominantly American and British, far more than Irish. <br />
<br />
:::::::::::::: By more than a 3:1 margin the term "Good Friday Agreement" is used by the public. The fact that some Irish newspapers, which are themselves more liberal than the Irish public, use the term "Belfast Agreement" is an awfully weak rationale. There is no sign that the decision at Wikipedia was made by Irishmen. Odds are that this decision was made by the typically liberal editors there who seek to censor Christian. Many other points in [[Bias in Wikipedia]] illustrate the same bias at Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:54, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::::::::::::WP's bias is shown by it using the document's official name? (See WaltherPPK's link to the Northern Ireland Office) [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 19:03, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::::: ASchlafly, I protest because I know I am right and that you are wrong. First, I note you continue to assert the Google-sourced 3:1 ratio - except you now claim it's "the public". If Google is equal to "the public", I'll be damned. Please don't try and pull the wool over people's eyes - the world exists beyond the confines of Google, you know. Secondly, you clearly know ''nothing'' about the Irish media landscape (and, in fairness, I wouldn't expect you to), and you obviously haven't read any of my supporting references. Two are from newspapers - one being slightly left-of-centre (Irish Times), and one being right-of-centre (Independent). The third reference was a TV channel. They represent the non-tabloid news sources in the country. The other non-tabloid newspaper is to the right of these, and is only published on Sundays. Given your lack of knowledge of the Irish media scene, how you "know" that Irish newspapers are more liberal than the Irish public, I'd be interested to know. Are you an expert on every country in the world? Finally, you have obviously not looked at the Northern Ireland Office (of the UK Government) document on the Agreement (which I referenced above), which states "The Agreement (also known as the Good Friday Agreement or Belfast Agreement) was reached in Belfast on Friday, April 10 1998". Re-read Jalapeno's comments above as to the reason WHY politicans and public figures in Ireland PREFER the term 'Belfast Agreement to Good Friday Agreement. While your ignorance of the world may be appealing to an uneducated Amero-centric reader base, rest assured those of us from other nations will not lie down and let YOU tell US how we name our institutions, offices, or policy. Good day to you Sir. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 19:19, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::::: Walter, your ranting is getting out of control. I do know quite a bit about the Irish press, Ireland, and Wikipedia. In fact, I've been quoted in the past in the Irish newspapers. Yes, they are more liberal than the Irish public, and Irishmen have relatively little influence at Wikipedia. The British and American influence, by liberals, is far stronger. It's absurd, frankly, for you to claim that the naming of the Agreement is due to the position of the Irish press.<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::::: Want to rely on the Northern Ireland Office? Fine. It provides the "Good Friday Agreement" as the first choice, even though alphabetically it would come second. Use it and please stop pretending that the atheists at Wikipedia lack bias. Read the scores of other examples of the same [[Bias in Wikipedia]] and end your [[liberal denial]]. Godspeed. I expect you will insist on [[last wordism]] now.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:40, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::::::: ASchlafly, Where did I claim "that the naming of the Agreement is due to the position of the Irish press"? We're trying to make you understand the sensitivities of Northern Irish politics - re-read Japaleno's comment above please as to why "Belfast Agreement" is actually the '''preferred''' term - you should be especially sensitive to the fact that the reason it's ''not'' named "Good Friday Agreement" is '''for''' religious reasons. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 20:03, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===References===<br />
Here's [http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/index.asp?locID=361&docID=219&COMMAND=PRINTER the document itself], which shows that ''technically'', its title is '''The Northern Ireland Peace Agreement'''. (''All other names are therefore colloquial terms''). Here are some references from official Irish government websites showing many different terms used for the Agreement: [http://www.equality.ie/index.asp?locID=135&docID=507], [http://www.citizensinformation.ie/References/legislative/legislative-background-to-irish-citizenship], [http://ombudsman.gov.ie/en/Legislation/TheOmbudsmanAct1980/], [http://www.president.ie/index.php?section=5&speech=176&lang=eng], or [http://www.ga.etenders.gov.ie/search/show/search_view.aspx?ID=MAY102655 this one, wherein it is referred to as "The Belfast Agreement of Good Friday"]. A brief scan of any of these will show you that any term is equally usable, and that 'Good Friday Agreement' is simply one of them. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 20:50, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Could someone move [[Camp David Accords]] to [[Constitution Day Agreement]] or [[Saint Lambert Agreement]]? It just happens that September 17th (the day the accord was signed) is a a political holiday in North America and it should be named accordingly. Alternatively, September 17th is also the feast of Saint Lambert and it is disappointing that people are not recognizing the religious significance of the date and instead using the more widely known, secular, place name. --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 18:12, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Does this mean that CP has an anti-Christian and/or anti-American bias? [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 18:32, 3 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
----<br />
Google may not be the same as the public, but it's likely to be fairly close, and is about the best idea of public usage that we have readily available. So Andy's correct point that the term "Good Friday Agreement" is more common that "Belfast Agreement" holds up, pending better evidence to the contrary.<br />
<br />
However, I don't think it's a good entry to have in the list, unless we have some evidence of Wikipedia using the Belfast name for (anti-)religious reasons. That may be a plausible explanation (Wikipedia does tend to be anti-Christian), but in this case using the Good Friday name hardly advances Christianity at all, so Wikipedia would have little motive to change it on that basis. So although the argument ''may'' be correct, it would be better to not use this example and stick with just having stronger examples.<br />
<br />
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:28, 4 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Philip, a few points. 1) The specific words written by ASchlafly which I objected to and removed from the article described the term "Belfast Agreement" as "ambiguous and unfamiliar", not 'less popular'. The copious evidence I have provided has shown that the term is neither officially nor colloquially considered "ambiguous and unfamiliar", but is in regular, everyday use in the community where it is most often discussed by both of the Governments concerned and amongst the press and general public; 2) Not only that, but others have explained that there is actually an underlying reason why, for obvious reasons of religious sensitivity to all communities, religious terms are generally ''avoided'' in political debate in Northern Ireland; 3) It seems Mr.Schlafly's Amero-centric view of the world and his ignorance of Irish affairs led him to presume guilt on behalf of the Wikipedia editors where there was none; 4) Finally, I note that the Wikipedia article on the Agreement '''very clearly''' lists the term 'Good Friday Agreement' as "alternatively and widely known" in the opening sentence of their article, and the term Good Friday Agreement redirects to the article as one would expect [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belfast_Agreement]. In short, not only was the assumption wrong, the facts were wrong, and the case didn't even exist. I notice you too are sometimes upset when foreigners presume to know about Antipodean affairs, so I thank you for your analysis of this mistaken example. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 12:09, 4 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:: 1) I agree. I was responding to comments on this page, not to the wording in the article.<br />
:: 2) This seems to be supporting that Wikipedia's choice of label ''was'' chosen for religious reasons.<br />
:: 3) I can't see what US-centricity has to do with this particular case.<br />
:: 4) I can't see that this is any sort of rebuttal. The fact is that Wikipedia has chosen to not use (as the article title) the official name of the agreement, but what appears to be the lesser-used of the two most-commonly-used unofficial titles. And by the way, I Googled the two unofficial names on all English-language pages, on .au pages, and on .uk pages, and in all three cases, the Good Friday name was the most popular by a significant margin. So it's not as though one is more popular in American and the other in Britain, for example. So although it's unknown why Wikipedia has gone for the lesser-used title, I don't think that it's safe to jump to the conclusion that it's for anti-Christian reasons, although neither should that reason be ruled out.<br />
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:56, 4 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: Walther, Wikipedia has chosen the less popular, but more secular, name. As Philip observes, you now seem to be saying that Wikipedia did do this for religious reasons after all. Maybe what is needed is for Wikipedia to explain its decision. Perhaps the edit history can be checked, and the person responsible can be asked. I'm confident that Irish newspapers had nothing to do with the decision. <br />
<br />
::: There may even be a formal Wikipedia policy favoring secular names rather than religious ones. Guess what? I just typed in "Saint Valentine's Day," and Wikipedia redirects me to the secular form, "Valentine's Day." I could repeat that exercise with other examples and I'm confident the same pro-secular result would be obtained.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:24, 4 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: The edit history shows that the Wikipedia article was started in 2001 as 'Belfast Agreement'. There was a proposal to move the article to 'Good Friday Agreement' in 2005 that failed due to lack of consensus. There is a long and ignoble history of naming disputes in Northern Ireland (e.g. [[Londonderry#Nomenclature]]) and those of us who are familiar with this part of the world know will appreciate that if there is a workable neutral term available then it's almost always best to stick to that rather than risk stirring up sectarian passions. Of course Conservapedia, as an explicitly pro-US site, is free to ignore political subtleties in other parts of the world. Interestingly Conservapedia has ''separate'' articles on [[Belfast Agreement]] and [[Good Friday Agreement]] -- what should we make of that! [[User:Jalapeno|Jalapeno]] 01:10, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::: Oh no, we have entries for each! :-) Thanks for pointing that out. What do you suggest we do about it?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 08:32, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::I'm not really part of this argument, but I suggest they be merged, under whatever name you prefer, with the other redirecting to it. -[[User:CSGuy|CSGuy]] 09:34, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::: Given the far greater usage, familiarity and descriptiveness of the term "Good Friday Agreement," I think that is the obvious choice. Wouldn't you agree?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:41, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::: I'm not sure that "Good Friday Agreement" is more descriptive, but I agree that it appears to be more common. However, rather than take sides on this, why not go with the ''official'' title given above (assuming that's correct; I haven't checked it): "The Northern Ireland Peace Agreement". Both the other terms can be redirects to that. I'm not suggesting this solely to avoid taking sides (I'm happy to take sides where it's warranted), but when there is an official title and two unofficial titles, why not go with the official title? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:48, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::: Your suggestion is a good one, assuming that really is the official name. Let's see what others have to say here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:53, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::: Please create the new article as Philip suggested. It is really the only ''correct'' way to title the article, and you can finally claim to have an article that is ''more correctly named'' than Wikipedia. It is the official name for the Agreement, as evidenced by [http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/Pdf%20files/NIPeaceAgreement.pdf this, the official Irish Government PDF version] of the document. All other names are colloquial terms and may be redirects to it. Thank you for finally understanding my position. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 11:10, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::: OK, but do you agree that "Saint Valentine's Day" is the correct name for that entry and that Wikipedia is biased in claiming otherwise?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:13, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::: Google shows that uses of "Valentine's Day" outnumber "Saint Valentine's Day" by '''more than a 235:1 ratio''', so I think the answer is obviously not, no. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 11:45, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::: I feel like Charlie Brown after Lucy invited him to kick the football, but then pulled the ball away at the last minute (using incorrect data as well - try "St. Valentine's Day" too). Walther, you just refused to apply your reasoning to an analogous situation, and instead insisted on censoring the religious name a second time. To say your approach just lost credibility would be an understatement.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:24, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::::::::::: ASchlafly, I am using the methodology you recommended [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia&diff=next&oldid=465265 in your comment above] - using Google hits to determine 'truth'. As to spellings and typos, it makes little difference - "St.Valentine's Day"=563,000 hits and "Saint Valentine's Day"=176,000, a total of 739,000 hits. "Valentine's Day"=41,500,000 hits, and "Valentines Day"=19,600,000 hits, or a total of 61 million hits, giving a ratio of 82:1 in favour of the non-religious form. Thus, by your suggested methodology as above, all articles regarding the 14th Feb should be retitled "Valentine's Day", and the religious forms should be redirects. [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] 13:15, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::::::: But you already emphatically rejected that methodology and, besides, "St. Valentine's Day" is unquestionably the historically correct name. "Belfast Agreement" has no historical claim to accuracy. While I was willing to compromise, you were not: you are adamant that the non-religious name be chosen in both circumstances, for contradictory reasons.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:34, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
::::::::::::::::So let me get this right: Your methodology is using Google rankings and hits to decide whether or not to use a certain name for an article on Conservapedia. First of all, you have a go at [[User:WaltherPPK|WaltherPPK]] for not using your methodology and then, after using it and displaying the results, you criticize him even more for doing so? Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't... [[User:Dnotice|Dnotice]] 14:50, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::::::::: Rather than creating a new article, one of the existing articles should be renamed. Probably the Good Friday Agreement one, given that it was started first. Of course only a sysop can do that, but there's enough of us around. Are we agreed on that course of action? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:22, 5 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Wikipedia "bias" ==<br />
<br />
When Wikipedia says that "Obama entered Harvard Law School in fall 1988 and at the end of his first year was selected as an editor of the law review based on his grades and a writing competition", it's because it's [http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/?page=full sourced.] The fact that [[User:ASchlafly|you]] disagree doesn't constitute bias.{{unsigned|Tennant}}<br />
<br />
: Surely you don't suggest that merely citing a (liberal) source makes something true and unbiased.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 14:13, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:I think the Wikipedia sourcing is somewhat poor, but until there's evidence that he was chosen due to the quota, this "example of bias" should definitely be removed. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 14:15, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Ah yes, because no non-anglo-saxon person ever has good grades. That sounds a lot like racism on Mr. Schlafly's part. [[User:SugarCup|SugarCup]] 15:37, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::To my knowledge, the policy at Wikipedia is that everything must be correctly sourced - i.e., it's enough if the source is reputable, and the entry is relevant. It doesn't matter if the source is liberal, conservative, anarchist, fascist, monarchist, socialist, regionalist, communist, christian, buddhist, atheist, nationalist, chauvinist, et cetera. Thank you. --[[User:Tennant|Tennant]] 17:53, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::Aschlafly, the problem with your entry is that if you follow that pattern, then you should insert each and every liberal quote on Wikipedia, from ''every'' article. '''--[[User:Tennant|Tennant]] 18:28, 17 June 2008 (EDT)'''<br />
<br />
:::More to the point there is nothing in the reference we supply here to indicate that Obama was selected on the basis of his race. Does Conservapedia want to have a ''lower'' standard of fact checking than Wikipedia? [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 13:48, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Isn't this article biased as well?==<br />
Sorry-I'm new-but isn't this article biased by saying that Wikipedia is biased? This is sort of like a personal account, depending on personal judgement. And plus this sounds like publically directing a criticism against Wikiepdia. PLus I think some of the stuff has already been changed or reverted--[[User:Faizaguo|Faizaguo]] 17:04, 17 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
:How does claiming that something is biased constitute bias? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:14, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Wikipedia includes phony quote for over three years ==<br />
<br />
The phony quote in question is as follows:<br />
<blockquote><br />
The objective [of the Wedge Strategy] is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to 'the truth' of the Bible and then 'the question of sin' and finally 'introduced to Jesus.'<br />
</blockquote><br />
This appeared on at least three pages. Here is how the pages appeared recently before I attempted to remove the quote:<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phillip_E._Johnson&oldid=219686529#Criticisms Phillip E. Johnson]<br /><br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teach_the_Controversy&oldid=219162996#The_Discovery_Institute Teach the Controversy]<br /><br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedge_strategy&oldid=215173365#Origins_of_the_movement_and_strategy Wedge strategy]<br />
<br />
And here's where the quote was added for each page:<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phillip_E._Johnson&diff=prev&oldid=12617922 Phillip E. Johnson - April 21, 2005]<br /><br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teach_the_Controversy&diff=prev&oldid=12219123 Teach the Controversy - April 12, 2005]<br /><br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wedge_strategy&diff=prev&oldid=15250578 Wedge strategy - June 15, 2005]<br />
<br />
There's absolutely no indication that this is anything other than a direct quote. I found that the quote was completely bogus [http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/02/post-4.html here] and [http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Phillip_E._Johnson here]. According to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blp#Remove_unsourced_or_poorly_sourced_contentious_material Wikipedia's Biographies of Living Persons] policy, such false material should be removed immediately and without discussion.<br />
<br />
This removal didn't sit well with the anti-ID crowd, however, and I came under vicious assault, particularly from one editor. I ultimately prevailed, and though the quote was not removed, it was moved and clarified as being a paraphrase. All the accusations made against me were found to be without merit, but the person making them continues to make them. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 12:36, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Obama's selection as editor==<br />
This article states as if it were a fact that Obama was chosen for this position on the basis of his race. However the references don't say that - they do say that a person ''might'' be selected on the basis of affirmative action, but there is nothing to indicate that Obama's selection was on this basis. We need to fix this. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 13:46, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Michael Moore==<br />
"the lying, deceitful films of Michael Moore". What, are we deliberately trying not to get taken seriously here? How can we go around accusing other people of bias and then expressing what is clearly someone's opinion as if it were fact? [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 14:04, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Well, it's pretty much a proven fact that Moore deceptively edits his films. Two examples in particular are his acquisition of a gun at a bank and his manipulation of statements made by Charlton Heston. Those are just two out of many that immediately come to mind. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 14:07, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:It's bias to push this point up front. We don't describe Richard Nixon as "liar and felon" every time we talk about him. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 15:18, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Analysis of Claims ==<br />
<br />
I am One For Logic (also spelled oneforlogic or Oneforlogic), a regular user and editor of Wikipedia for several years. I began reading some articles on Conservapedia a few weeks ago. This is an interesting project. I will readily admit that the quality of writing and sourcing of articles in Wikipedia is not always the highest, so in the spirit of supporting well-intentioned dissent (which is what I’m assuming this is; let me know now if I’m wrong) I’m going to check on the claims on this page and explain what I find. If I conclude that any of these claims are valid, I will discuss and attempt to edit the relevant Wikipedia articles myself. I expect many of you will want to comment on this effort; please do so in the next section. I welcome your input. Signed [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 15:01, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
'''Current Issue 1: SDI'''<br />
<br />
Wow, you guys are good at this. Slow down on the new claims a little so I can keep up. I'll study the SDI article later. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 19:16, 4 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
'''Current Issue 2: Controversy Sections'''<br />
<br />
The articles provided as examples are definitely organized differently. If any Conservapedia editor is sufficiently knowledgeable about Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, or Jane Fonda and would like to take the time to reorganize the material in the Wikipedia articles, go for it. I'm afraid I don't know enough about any of them and don't have enough free time to reorganize the articles myself. I also don't think this is really a case of serious systematic bias; I'd need to see more examples before I'd be convinced. It may also be relevant to note that Wikipedia guidelines discourage use of "Controversy" sections, and that those sections in both the Limbaugh and Malkin articles had been flagged to be reorganized or otherwise improved. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 21:28, 3 July 2008 (EDT) <br />
<br />
: You describe a futile exercise, as many of us here have tried to edit out some of the liberal bias in Wikipedia. The mob there simply reinstates the bias and even seems to enjoy doing so.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:51, 3 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I'm sure you've been studying this longer than I have, but I have not yet encountered this angry liberal mob you describe. I have, just like all of you, had some of my edits falsely described as vandalism or removed without reason, but I have always discussed any changes to my work that seemed inappropriate and have often gotten useful feedback. Most of the people that care about an article enough to quickly revert edits they find disagreeable seem, in my experience, willing to discuss those edits. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 19:09, 4 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
: For more about how WP deals with these "Criticism/Controversy" sections read [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criticism Wikipedia's guideline on including Criticism] --[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 20:46, 4 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
'''Issue 3: GA status of Wikipedia's Conservapedia article<br />
<br />
I would not have nominated this article to be listed as a good article. You were correct that the new cite on that statement did not ''explicitly'' state that Conservapedia contains factual errors. I have since revised the statement to more closely reflect what the article does say, which is still harshly critical of Conservapedia. <br />
<br />
Update: I've been going back and forth on this with a few other editors. Most of the other editors agree that we need very explicit sources to claim that Conservapedia has factual errors. I am now convinced that we have three, and I have attached all of them to the 'factual errors' claim in the introduction. I still don't think the first cite on that claim supports it, but the editor that insists on including it hasn't responded to my discussion thread for a couple days. I do now believe that the claim is sufficiently verified. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 19:09, 4 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: "Oneforlogic", you lack logic here and show your own bias. The "factual errors" claim is an obvious smear and the citations both utterly fail to support the claim and are absurdly biased themselves. You seem to think it's OK to cite a heavily biased source to justify a smear. It isn't, obviously. Conservapedia has no more "factual errors" than any other wiki. If you persist in asserting this harmful smear, then I'm unlikely to bother reviewing any of your other arguments further. Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:38, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
"Both" citations? Which ones were you looking at? Both occurrences of the factual inacuracy claim now have 4 citations: one (#8, the Guardian article) that I believe does not directly address factual errors but is favored by another editor (and does mention that liberals engage in factual relativism as often as conservatives, which I consider generally true), and three that, while they address other issues and are obviously not supportive of Conservapedia, do directly discuss factual issues. I'm certainly not arguing in any way that Wikipedia is error-free, or even particularly more accurate than Conservapedia; I'm looking specifically at the claim made by previous editors to Wikipedia's article on Conservapedia that Conservapedia has factual errors. I currently consider this a sufficiently verified claim.<br />
<br />
If there must be an agenda or conspiracy behind my actions here, it is this: I want to improve Wikipedia in whatever small ways I can as an individual editor, and I want to come to understand the conflict between conservatives and liberals better. I don't consider myself either, and you'd find that my political inclinations really don't line up consistently with either general ideology. If you're interested in any particular examples, let me know and I can post a few on my user page here. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 21:15, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Sir, you call yourself "Oneforlogic", but you haven't even quoted my concise reply in a logical matter. Read it again, and then read your quote of "'both' citations." Hopefully you can see yourself the flaw in your analysis of my straightforward reply.<br />
<br />
: The broader point is this: Wikipedia's biased smear of Conservapedia is unsupported by the citations and contrary to logic, yet you now defend it primarily because another editor at Wikipedia wants it to stay. Alas, that is the essence of liberal bias on Wikipedia. Wikipedia bias is not a conspiracy; it's bullying by liberals until others simply give in because they don't care to oppose it. Needless to say, Conservapedia editors are cut from a different cloth: we do care about the truth and we don't allow here the smears, half-truths, and gossip that plague Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:06, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: If I may ask, the page on Barack Obama starts off with the claim that he wasn't born in Hawaii (http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert is a scan of his birth certificate), claims that he is islamic and makes use of a number of smears, half truths, and repeating of gossip. If it is as important as you say that these things are not allowed on Conservapedia, who should we see about getting the page unlocked and rewritten in an honest and truthful manner? --[[User:Rutm|Rutm]] 22:33, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::: "Rutm", your comment is off-topic because the issue here is Wikipedia bias and Conservapedia accuracy. Our entry about Obama is accurate and your comment is misleading in claiming that our Obama entry is otherwise. Proper questions have been raised by an objective Israeli news service about the authenticity and type of Obama's birth certificate (why is the certificate number blotted out, for example, which would reflect the time the certificate was issued?). Also, "Rutm", as I've indicated before, your insulting name is getting tiresome. Request a change to your real first name and last initial or your account will be blocked, and you can push your liberal POV on Wikipedia instead.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:38, 6 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::Excuse me for being unable to reply more quickly, Aschafly, as someone seems to have blocked my normal account. So you meant “both” as in “the citations fail to meet both objectives” instead of “both citations fail to meet the objectives”. You know as well as I do that these are equally valid interpretations. My apologies for being such a liberal idiot that I picked the wrong one. <br />
<br />
::::So, to be clear, instead of having an honest and open discussion of the other editor’s views and thoughts on his work, you would have me arbitrarily remove it without discussing it? That is completely contrary to the purpose of a wiki-based project. The wiki format only really works if people collaborate and discuss their differences, openly and publicly. You’ve made it clear that you are not comfortable with any working conditions in which you exercise less than complete control. I even offered to defend ''your side'' in this issue and you still brand me as your enemy by locking out my account.<br />
<br />
::::I really did hope to learn about conservatives and their conflicts with liberals here. And, in a way, I guess I still did. I already knew that radical liberals could be hostile and repressive toward people with views they disagree with, now I know that radical conservatives are just as bad. It’s kind of ironic that in that way, at least, the two extremes are exactly alike. Signed, [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]], aka [[User:OneAgainstRepression|OneAgainstRepression]] 13:42, 6 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
Ok, another idea, since you probably still need convincing on my good intentions, let's talk about an interesting caveat in Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Contrary to popular opinion, WP:NPOV indicates that all majority or large minority views on an issue should be presented in the relevant article, preferably in proportion to their level of support. It does not state that only neutral views should be presented. I imagine you had already read such policies carefully, but it's good to remember for context. So, to prove my goodwill, do you know of a source that supports Conservapedia's factual accuracy? If you do, post a link on my talk page and I will add mention of it to the Wikipedia article and defend the source if/when it is removed. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 22:02, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
'''Issue 4: Liberal Criticism'''<br />
<br />
I believe that any liberal bias present in Wikipedia is far less systematic than Conservapedia admins would have us believe, but I’m not going to go read every Wikipedia article to try to evaluate such a general claim. More specifically, the article on Debbie Riddle is fairly short, so the ‘free education comes from Russia’ quote will easily dominate the article until it is expanded. I highly doubt that any Wikipedia editor would object to more information on her accomplishments being added. Chuck Schumer’s article does indeed speak favorably of him at several points; there is a healthy discussion of the article’s neutrality in the discussion page. I’ll look for sources critical of the senator and add them to that discussion soon. Of course, any and all Conservapedia users are welcome to do the same.<br />
<br />
'''Issue 5: Obama’s selection as an editor on the Harvard Law Review'''<br />
<br />
Your own source makes this issue clear; in 1982, the Review adopted a policy that allowed editors to consider race while selecting new editors but did not provide for specific racial quotas. This source does discuss a short-lived quota-like policy, created in 1981, that was quickly replaced by the much less specific 1982 racial consideration policy. It cannot be clearly established how much this policy contributed to Obama’s selection as an editor, and as the Wikipedia article in question does not and should not focus on the specific policies of the Review, it seems acceptable to me that this article does not highlight this policy. <br />
<br />
'''Issue 6: Censorship'''<br />
<br />
The Wikipedia article on censorship does need to be expanded by an expert. I am not familiar with any specific cases of prayer, pro-life advertisements, or conservative newspapers being successfully censored, but I know that attempts to censor these things are made and they should be mentioned in the article. Let me know if any of you know of good sources of more detailed information on this kind of censorship. However, the article does discuss the issue of censoring discussion of creationism in public schools. The article indicates that many religious groups feel that not being allowed to teach creationism is censorship; it goes on to reference two court cases that established, first, that teaching creationism is equivalent to promoting the Christian faith and is illegal in public schools, and second, that intelligent design is a form of creationism. Regardless of your opinion on these issues, the Wikipedia article does cite and explain (in separate articles) the relevant court cases, which seems to me to be a completely legitimate way to discuss censorship of intelligent design.<br />
<br />
'''Issue 7: Smearing Conservapedia'''<br />
<br />
Wikipedia’s article on Conservapedia appears to have been discussed and improved a lot in recent months, and I would consider the current version ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Conservapedia&oldid=221432211 13:49, 24 June 2008]) to be at least decently written and sourced. Wikipedia’s article no longer cites that particular New York Times source. There are, indeed, a great many sources that criticize Conservapedia as biased or just plain humorous, and I have not yet found any sources of serious support for Conservapedia. If any of you know of such a source, it may be worth adding to Wikipedia’s article. You may be technically correct that criticisms of Conservapedia’s factual accuracy, specifically, are rare, but that would only be because so many of the critical articles out there just skip straight to denouncing Conservapedia as a joke and don’t really seriously analyze it. Whether this is fair and proper or not is a separate debate. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 10:57, 24 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
'''Issue 8: Homosexual Agenda'''<br />
<br />
The Wikipedia article on Robert Maplethorpe does mention criticism of his “sexually-charged photographs of black men” and the “racial undertones of [his] imagery”; this article could benefit from being expanded generally, and a reference to the biographer cited here could be a useful addition. The Wikipedia article on the American Family Association’s section on the group’s anti-Semitism now has many citations, most of which seem to legitimately support their claims. It is possible that some of these are recent additions. <br />
<br />
Regarding the alleged “homosexual agenda” in general: I believe that both sides are handling this issue badly. The anger and indignation on both sides become harder and harder to calm as the conflict goes on. There are always moderate solutions to be found if both sides are willing to look for them and negotiate with each other. Being "anti-gay" and "anti-Christian" are both pointless positions; the average viewpoint of society will, inevitably, end up somewhere between the extremes. <br />
<br />
<br />
I'll continue to add more as I have time to do so.<br />
<br />
== Reactions ==<br />
<br />
I look forward to your feedback. [[User:Oneforlogic|Oneforlogic]] 15:02, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== There were some notable incidents in the media ==<br />
<br />
One was the SlimVirgin/Linda Mack stuff. A lot of press. Then there was the Gary Weiss/Mantanmoreland socking that for years he got away with using lots of sock puppets to spin biases in favor of illegal activity and anyone who tried to stop him was banned. This was in the media a lot, but not as much as the Linda Mack spy stuff. Then there was the Harsbara Fellowships, a group that hired people to insert biases into the encyclopedia and was led by one of their top administrators, Jayjg, though this doesn't have as much news article as the other two. Anyone else familiar with these? They are well known. I don't have any news articles right offhand, but could dig some up. It would help if others were familiar with this, too. [[User:RobertBobkins|RobertBobkins]] 15:14, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
I forgot, Rachel Marsden, there were some stuff about this in one online newspaper. She had an affair with Jimbo Wales and so he let her have her way in her biography. Then when news about this got out, Jimbo broke up with her on-wiki, instead of telling her in person and she found out indirectly. So she then sold Jimbo's clothes he left at her apartment on ebay. One shirt even had a peculiar white stain on it. I forgot if Jimbo Wales also is still married, but I think he is. [[User:RobertBobkins|RobertBobkins]] 15:17, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
: This article is ''examples of bias'' in Wikipedia. I think you want the [[Wikipedia]] article. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:21, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Six times==<br />
I'm sorry, but this is funny. One of the accusations of bias is that Wikipedia states "Conservapedia has asserted that Wikipedia is 'six times more liberal than the American public', a statistic which has been criticized for its poor extrapolation and lack of credibility." However further down the ''same page'' I find "twice as many Americans identify themselves as "conservative" compared with "liberal", and that ratio has been increasing for two decades. But on Wikipedia, about three times as many editors identify themselves as "liberal" compared with "conservative". That suggests Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public.".<br />
<br />
The latter calculation is of such astonishing naivity, and so laughable in it's lack of rigor, that it is totally unsurprising that Wikipedia ridicules it. If we allow statements like this we deserve to be the object of derision. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 15:26, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Aschlafly==<br />
Hi Aschlafly. I notice you just undid some changes I made to this page to reflect a) a logical inconsistency and b) something that was no longer true of Wikipedia. Would you like to explain what the problem was with my edits? [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 16:53, 23 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Barak Obama==<br />
I removed some stuff about Barak Obama being selected as Harvard Law Editor on racial grounds. There was no reference to back it up, so it is not verifiable according to the Conservapedia commandments. The only reference described the affirmative action system of selection, but did not say that Obama benefitted from it (the description makes it clear that only about 20% of people selected are on the basis of affirmative action). [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 09:26, 24 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Title of the article==<br />
I was reading the manual of style, and it says "Titles should be in lowercase except for proper nouns". Shouldn't "bias" be lowercased? [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 13:50, 24 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== "Expelled" the only WP movie article which includes the phrase "nominal dollars" ==<br />
<br />
Parenthetical statement in the second sentence of the second paragraph [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed here]. I Googled "nominal dollars" for WP articles [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=active&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=frT&q=%22nominal+dollars%22+site:wikipedia.org&start=0&sa=N&filter=0 here] and found that the only movie that shows up is ''Expelled''. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Expelled:_No_Intelligence_Allowed#.22In_nominal_dollars.3F.22 My complaint] against the use of the phrase has been met with lackluster defenses. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:30, 29 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:So I went ahead and added the same phrase into the top 5 documentary films' articles on WP just to see what would happen. Two of the edits remain untouched. Two have been relegated to the status of being turned into bottom-of-the-page reference note. The last one resulted in a disagreement between other editors whether or not the phrase could be applied to such a new movie (''An Inconvenient Truth''), with the deletion of the phrase winning out so far. Let the record show that ''Expelled'' is newer than ''An Inconvenient Truth''. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:54, 1 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Wikidrama due to anti-ID bias ==<br />
<br />
A request for arbitration regarding the behavior of an anti-ID editor [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Orangemarlin here], which resulted in his threat to leave, his leaving and then his immediate return and the other anti-ID editor named leaving. In fact, lots of the anti-ID editors are involved. I believe it's all an extension of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Intelligent_Design this]. As long as ID is treated as it is on Wikipedia, this will continue to be a perfect storm of contempt, bias and controversy. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 02:25, 29 June 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Should out-n-out fraud be considered bias in Wikipedia?==<br />
<br />
Or maybe just to common. That story of the fired WP editor, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257340,00.html , Fox News, Wikipedia Editor Out After False Credentials Revealed, March 8, 2007</ref> --[[User:Jpatt|jp]] 14:20, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Kind of old. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 14:40, 5 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== WP "Quote-mining" article nothing more than an anti-Creationism hit piece ==<br />
<br />
Check it out [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quote_mining here]. Also see the discussion page [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Quote_mining here]. Lots of claims of this supposedly being a "well-documented" practice among Creationists, but little if any evidence of that is provided. Try to edit the article to reflect this fact and the evolutionist cabal is quick to revert it under false pretenses. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 15:54, 14 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Username "ChristianityMeansFreedom" judged to be "profane, disruptive, or otherwise inappropriate" ==<br />
<br />
Holy cow! I wouldn't have believed it without seeing it for my own eyes.<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ChristianityMeansFreedom Block message on user page]<br />
<br />
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=223450235#Disruptive_editor_User:ChristianityMeansFreedom Admin noticeboard history]<br />
<br />
The guy's edits weren't even that horrible. Certainly not vandalism. They might have taken some time to discuss the edits with the user, but they judged the user name to be offensive. Right. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:10, 22 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:That user was blocked for his provocatively anti-semitic edits, not his name. Perhaps he should have stuck to posting his right wing garbage over on the [[Stormfront]] forums. [[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|שועל]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 10:19, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::But that's not the reason given for blocking him. And I looked at his edits. I saw nothing that was obviously anti-Semitic. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 10:30, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::It says in very clear letters: '''"This account has been blocked indefinitely because it has become apparent that the account is only being used for vandalism."''' The fact that the name could be further construed as an anti-semitic sentiment, given the edit history of the vandal, was mentioned as an additional support for the user account being blocked. The discussion on the admin board is about his propensity for altering articles dealing with Christianity and Judaism to make digs at Jews and Judaism. And they're blatantly obvious. [[Image:User Fox.png|10px]] [[User:Fox|שועל]] <small>([[User talk:Fox|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Fox|contribs]])</small> 10:49, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
Jinxmchue you said "I saw nothing that was obviously anti-Semitic". Did you not see this one here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Christianity_and_Judaism&diff=prev&oldid=211498797]<br />
or do you not think it is anti-semitic? A quick glance through his contributions show them almost all to be anti-semitic [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=ChristianityMeansFreedom&namespace=&year=&month=-1]--[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 11:03, 25 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Antisemitism in the New Testament? ==<br />
<br />
This is cleanly mislead, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_New_Testament]. All I found is people got wrong ideas. I was thinking about adding to the list, but I'm not sure, yet. --[[User:TagoPagdaluhong|TagoPagdaluhong]] 21:28, 26 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Wikipedia acknowledges all subjects and opinions. Conservapedia does not. Hmmm, which one is biased? ==<br />
<br />
TSIB. Step back a minute & think about what you are really objecting to in Wikipedia. What you perceive as bias is the exact opposite. Wikipedia explores all subjects and acknowledges diverse attitudes to them, without jumping to conclusions. It maintains a neutral point of view, since any additions have to be backed up with reliable evidence. You may choose to regard this as "liberal bias", but that is only because Wikipedia does not censor and interpret its subjects as Conservapedia does. Conservapedia does not even pretend to have a neutral point of view. It wears its bias on its sleeve and openly propogates intolerant viewpoints. And it's for this exact reason that Conservapedia, unlike Wikipedia, will never be regarded as a factual or "trustworthy" reference source by the wider community. [[User:BeReasonable|BeReasonable]] 20:43, 27 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Please read [[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]]. Everything you level as accusations is freely admitted and explained. And incidentally, Wikipedia is not regarded as a factual or trustworthy reference source by most educators and experts. Try to use it as a source on a term paper and you will more than likely get called on it. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 22:37, 27 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Of course wikipedia is not a "trustworthy" reference with regards to the scientific/academic community, and by no means is CP. Any website that is openly editable is inherently un-trustowrthy for academia. Wikipedia, however, is a trustworthy reference for the average user, the user who wants a good overview of the subject in question, the user that wants the facts with as little bias or spin as possible. Wikipedia never claims to be an academic resource (and no decent academic would ever consider it as such, even in highschool, wikipedia is never considerd a "citable" source) but rather a means to get the "gist" of a topic and a gateway to more reliable sources. Do not try and put words in the wikipedia mission statement. --[[User:AndrasK|AndrasK]] 11:13, 28 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== John Edwards ==<br />
Wikipedia is getting hammered over its censorship of the “John Edwards love child” story [http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/07/28/wikipedia-disallows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal] [http://gawker.com/5029921/john-edwards-wikipedia-page-strangely-love-child+free] [http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2052379/posts] [http://conservativepulse.com/home/2008/07/edwards-sex-scandal-still-hasnt-surfaced-in-the-mainstream-press/]. This story has a gossipy feel and Conservapedia discourages gossip. However, several different outlets have reported it. I think it should be included as an example of wiki’s bias, but would like to know what other people think because of the gossipy nature of the story. [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 21:33, 28 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
:An entry I made about John Edwards was deleted [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia&diff=493702&oldid=493701]. This nature of this story is gossipy, but this page is primarily about bias in wikipedia. It’s worth mentioning that wikipedia allows gossipy stories with no credible sources about McCain because he is a Republican, but censors a similar credible story about Edwards because he is a Democrat. Is there a way the entry could be reworded so that it is acceptable? [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 18:36, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: You're so right that Wikipedia promotes gossip about conservatives, but immediately deletes it about liberals. This does illustrate Wikipedia's liberal bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:10, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:After the John Edwards hotel story became common knowledge, some wikipedia editors attempted to add it to his page. However, a wikipedia administrator deleted that information and locked the page to prevent the story from being included [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Edwards&diff=228426613&oldid=228425805]. Locking the pages of liberals when critical stories appear about them in the media is standard operating procedure at wikipedia. [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 22:05, 29 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
::As of the time I'm writing this, Wikipedia's article on Edwards [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Edwards&oldid=228904206#2008_Presidential_campaign has]:<br />
::"In July 2008, several news media outlets speculated that Edwards' chances for the vice presidency were harmed by allegations published in The National Enquirer that he had fathered a child outside his marriage, and that he had recently visited the child's mother at the Hilton Hotel in Beverly Hills, California.[59][60][61] Edwards refused to comment on the allegations, stating "I've responded, consistently, to these tabloid allegations by saying I don't respond to these lies and you know that."[62]"<br />
::So now that the ''real'' non-tabloid media has gotten to that story, editors have accepted addition of this information as long as this isn't given undue weight. Whew, we just got saved from another stigma on this page! Now, I'd like to make it clear that me & most other WP editors frown upon tabloids (e.g. ''National Enquirer'', ''New York Post'', ''The Sun'') as sources. Regarding "gossip about conservatives": what suddenly came to my mind was that infamous ''[[New York Times]]'' article that accused [[John McCain]] of having an affair with Vicki Iseman. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_McCain&oldid=228831017 WP's article on McCain] makes absolutely no mention of Iseman, but it ''is'' mentioned in WP's article [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_The_New_York_Times&oldid=222054349#John_McCain-lobbyist_article_criticism "Criticism of The New York Times"].--[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 20:11, 30 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::Furthermore, Wikipedia tries hard [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALinksearch&target=*.nationalenquirer.com not to source] the ''NatEnq'' in articles. --[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 20:20, 30 July 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Disagreeing with this article==<br />
I have to disagree with the statements made in this article, mainly because the people who are writing it have a strong conservative bias, (it seems to assume that all liberals are wrong and immoral, and that their opinions aren't valid) and that Wikipedia cannot be perfect. There is not a single entity that creates, reviews, and edits articles, it is millions of people across the globe. With that kind of userbase, bias will be inevitable. It is up to others to notice and repair that bias, as long as they add a properly sourced opinion for the other side, and that they keep original opinions intact. You see, if YOU spot bias, YOU can fix it. For example, for #11, just go fix it! The biography is a valid source, since it is a book and had to be published which has far less margin for error than, let's say, a blog. So just edit the article to say that some claim he is racist, cite the source, leave the so-called "liberal" opinion so it isn't conservatively biased, and you're done! Bias eliminated. A bias is favoring an opinion, whether it be "right" or "wrong", and lack of bias is showing all opinions. Conservapedia has a strong conservative bias, and it should recognize that, and understand that right and wrong is in the eye of the beholder, and understand the opinions of liberals and why they hold them, even if they disagree. [[User:Jedibob5|Jedibob5]] 15:46, 2 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: No, "right and wrong is" NOT "in the eye of the beholder," and Wikipedia is ruled by a liberal mob. Trying to fix something there is like trying to reason with a lynch mob. I think several of our points demonstrate what happens when someone tries to correct the bias to certain entries.<br />
<br />
: It takes affirmative steps, like laws and even-handed enforcement of them, to prevent lynch mobs from forming. Wikipedia does nothing to curb the bias that even you admit is inevitable.<br />
<br />
: As to Conservapedia, it discloses its point of view. Wikipedia should be honest and do the same.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:53, 2 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::First point, Liberals think that their ideas are "right", and conservatives are "wrong", and conservatives think the exact same thing about liberals. All right and wrong is is an opinion in itself. For instance, I believe that abortion, for instance, is wrong, since it kills a child, while another person over there might think that my ideas are wrong, and that outlawing abortion would strip freedom of choice from women. So the definitions of right and wrong are different from person to person, so really, they are "in the eye of the beholder."<br />
<br />
::Second point, lynch mobs? WP goes by consensus when there's a conflict, but you can't compare that to a lynch mob. The United States of America does that during an election, which elects those who will make decisions in our government based on consensus, and the ancient Romans decided on consensus as well back when they were a republic. Lynch mobs act on their own sense of vigilante justice, and care not for consensus.<br />
<br />
::Third point, "Wikipedia does nothing to curb the bias that even you admit is inevitable." Well, I don't really think that Conservapedia can really say that they do either, can they? And what WP does about curbing this is relying on the editors to do the corrections. Pointing out bias doesn't mean that Wikipedia condones it, it just means no one has got around to fixing it.<br />
<br />
::If you try to blame Wikipedia for being liberally biased, all you are doing is blaming the editors, who, invariably, have different opinions. WP cannot be blamed for the stuff that gets put on it, since WP does not put it on there, editors do. [[User:Jedibob5|Jedibob5]] 12:13, 5 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::Just because everyone subjectively '''thinks''' that they are right (after all, how can one possibly believe something and simultaneuously consider that belief wrong?) that doesn't make right and wrong subjective. Some issues truly can be called matters of opinion (i.e. not right or wrong, and no real "incorrect" either). However the "conservative" position (& therefore CP's '''acknowledged''' position) is that right & wrong are objective, absolute issues. The "liberal" position of existentialism (which you apparently subscribe to) is ''practiced'' (sort of) on WP but not acknowledged. Ironically, subscribing to the existenitalist/subjective view disallows you from disagreeing with conservative/objective view.<br />
<br />
:::Also, you idealise WP somewhat - and reveal a sizable dose of naivetee - if you truly believe what you posted about "consensus" and "no one has got around to fixing it". As one who has seriously attempted to "fix it" and to build consensus I can tell you that that is simply not how WP works, which is what most of the items in this article demonstrate. You also falsely separate WP from its editors; WP ''is'' the body of its editors/admins/oversight. They write the articles, they write the guidelines, they write the policies, they mediate and arbitrate disputes, they grant and remove editor rights.[[User:LowKey|LowKey]] 22:35, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Baraminology==<br />
"The Wikipedia entry on baraminology (a form of taxonomy) describes it as "pseudoscience" and "unrelated to science" simply because it was devised by a creationist. [6]"<br />
<br />
Interestingly, that doesn't seem to be what the Wikipedia article said as of 07:21, 25 July 2008:<br />
<br />
<blockquote>Baraminology has been heavily criticized for its lack of rigorous testing and post-study rejection of data to make it better fit the desired findings.[13] Baraminology is a pseudoscience, and has not produced any peer-reviewed scientific research,[14] nor is any word beginning with "baramin" found in Biological Abstracts, which has complete coverage of zoology and botany since 1924.[15] Universal common descent, which states that all life shares a common ancestor, is well-established and tested, and is a scientifically-verified fact.[16] However, neither cladistics, the field devoted to investigating the ancestral relationships between living things, nor the scientific consensus on transitional fossils are accepted by baraminologists.[17]</blockquote><br />
<br />
As far as I'm aware, the lack of peer-revied scientific research claim is correct, and worth noting. [[User:Wandering|Wandering]] 15:57, 3 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
I have read somewhere (I don't remember where, so I can't cite it) that there has been one peer-reviewed research study on baraminology that has been published so far. [[User:CogitoErgoSum|CogitoErgoSum]] 09:32, 4 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Curse the darkness, or light a candle?==<br />
<br />
I've got to thinking, why do we curse the darkness when we could just light a candle? Instead of coming here to complain about examples of bias on Wikipedia, why not just edit them out when you find them? [[User:CogitoErgoSum|CogitoErgoSum]] 11:34, 5 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Because that has been attempted by many of us, only to find the edits diluted or censored and bias reinserted.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:20, 20 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Founder of The Weather Channel removed from Category:Global Warming skeptics==<br />
<br />
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)&diff=232272809&oldid=227980118<br />
<br />
100+ scientists, and other global warming skeptics were removed from the category:Global Warming skeptics, because wikipedia decided to delete the category --<span style="margin-top: -3px;">&nbsp;[[Image:50 star flag.png|12px]]</span><span style="position:relative; overflow:hidden; width:88px; height:15px; z-index:2;"> [[User:Deborah|Deborah]] [[Special:Contributions/Deborah|<font color="gray">(contributions)</font>]] [[User_talk:Deborah|<font color="darkslategray">(talk)</font>]]<br />
[[Special:Emailuser/Deborah | email me]]</span> 21:57, 20 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: Fascinating, Deborah. Perhaps that should be made into a point here somehow. Thanks for your insight.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:21, 20 August 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::Actually, the reason why Wikipedia decided to delete the category was that its "overcategorization" guideline [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Overcategorization&oldid=233793984#Opinion_about_a_question_or_issue discourages] categorizing people by personal opinions on certain subjects.<br />
<br />
== Pinochet and Castro ==<br />
While the part about Castro is worth mentioning, we shouldn't exactly be quick to defend Pinochet. After 9/11 when they were investigating all sorts of money laundering schemes, the United States Senate discovered a huge network of money laundering accounts run by Pinochet and Sen. [[Norm Coleman]] referred to him in the [http://www.senate.gov/~levin/newsroom/release.cfm?id=233631 same report] as "a well-known human rights violator and violent dictator." It would be better to leave Pinochet out of the bullet point and focus on Castro. --[[User:Ampersand|Ampersand]] 23:24, 8 September 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== POV on this ==<br />
<br />
I think this article's tone should be edited. It tries to slam liberals on everything, rather than letting the facts speak for themselves. I do agree that something needs to be done though.<br />
[[User:RussellSprouts|RussellSprouts]] 20:51, 10 September 2008 (EDT) (Sorry forgot to sign)<br />
==Misrepresentations==<br />
I don't expect anything to change, but I feel I should point out a few problems with this page nevertheless:<br />
:2: [deletion of GW skeptics category] The category was deleted because it was poorly defined, not to whitewash. The weather channel guy's article still makes clear his opinion on the subject.<br />
:3: [Claims in the Gardisil article] The claims are backed up by reliable sources. Until they are contradicted by other reliable sources, I'm not sure what one would expect to do about this.<br />
:8: [Removal of claims about John Edwards] The Edwards affair was left out when the only source was the Enquirer, which WP does not consider reliable (for obvious reasons). It was added in very short order, and now the affair has an article of its own [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards_extramarital_affair].<br />
:9: [Cold fusion] Cold fusion is controversial, and the article makes no claim that it has been successfully carried out. I fail to see what "liberal" about cold fusion. If it can be performed, it would solve a great proportion of the world's energy problems. That is not a partisan issue.<br />
:11: [Avoiding the word "controversy" for liberals] The Jane Fonda article has sections clearly labeled "Vietnam War Controversy" and "Hanoi Jane".<br />
:12 and 16 are basically redundant, and inaccuracies on Conservapedia are cited.<br />
:20: [Article on gun politics] The phrase in question is a caption for a photograph, the photograph is not provided as "proff" for anything. The fact that the right to bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights shows that guns were a political issue.<br />
:21: [Expelled as a propaganda film] The film is no longer in that category.<br />
:50: [North American Union] There is now an article on this.<br />
There many are others that aren't even worth addressing, though I feel I should mention the BCE issue, as it if oft cited. If you have any questions about the preferred use, type "4 BCE" into the search box at Wikipedia and see what you are redirected to. [[User:BrianH|BrianH]] 12:50, 16 September 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
===Improvements?===<br />
Over the past month or so I've also tried improving certain wikipedia entries based on some concerns raised by editors of this page.<br />
*[[Marcus Borden]]: Since the section regarding the controversy over his prayer wasn't sourced, I researched on it and rewrote based on sourced. Additionally, I removed the biased language in question and instead focused on showing the reader the facts. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=East_Brunswick_Public_Schools&oldid=233151082#Football_coach_prayer_controversy]<br />
*[[James Monroe]]: I added this: "During his presidency, Congress demanded high subsidies for internal improvements, such as for the Cumberland Road.[2] Monroe vetoed the Cumberland Road Bill, which provided for yearly improvements to the road, because he believed it to be "unconstitutional" for the government to pass such a bill.[3]"[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Monroe&oldid=238834883#Policies]<br />
*Philadelphia lawyer: Clarified that the Zenger case merely ''inspired'' the term.[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philadelphia_lawyer&oldid=229926894]--[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 21:47, 16 September 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Also regarding some other issues raised on this talk page and the main page:<br />
*Profanity: The profanity policy I provided states that profanity in quotes can never be censored. Most of the time it's okay to paraphrase a quote that contains a profanity for the sakes of taste, and sometimes it's absolutely necessary to include uncensored profanity when all other choices are lost (i.e. the title of some vulgar songs).<br />
*Bias for evolution and against intelligent design, without disclosing? Actually Wikipedia has FAQ pages regarding why articles about [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Evolution/FAQ evolution] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Intelligent design/FAQ intelligent design] are written that way; it's that Wikipedia is following the scientific consensus accepting evolution and rejecting ID. I recall Aschlafly stating on a talk page that "Wikipedia should imply its POV" just like Conservapedia [[Conservapedia:Differences with Wikipedia|does]] too.<br />
*[[Benazir Bhutto]] and abortion: Bhutto's pro-life stance was added on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benazir_Bhutto&diff=196024457&oldid=195739121 March 5, 2008] and remained on the article afterwards. --[[User:Alpnineone|Alpnineone]] 17:33, 17 September 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Cause of Bias -- Lack of Oversight? ==<br />
<br />
I have recently been concerned over an extreme bias shown by Wikipedia editors on the English version of their web page describing the Falun Gong [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falun_gong] cult. This cult originated in China and has been the subject of many debates regarding how the Falun Gong followers have been treated by the Chinese government. What caught my attention is that there are material facts about the cult which are not discussed on the Wikipedia page. Digging into the mystery of the omissions, I examined the related "Discussions" page [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Falun_Gong]. I found that others have raised the issue of bias and missing information. However, the moderators refuse to allow any information critical of the Falun Gong onto the main page. For example, Falun Gong teaches that its practitioners can gain super-human powers such as levitation and clairvoyance and that there are two-billion year-old nuclear reactors in Africa [http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2922644]. Of course, there are more concerning omissions from the Wikipedia site than these strange beliefs. Their leader, Li Hongzhi, a former government grain department clerk and amateur trumpet player, claims demons and extraterrestrials are everywhere and that practitioners truly adhering to the cult's principles won't be hurt as much when hit by speeding cars as they otherwise would [http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2922644]. <br />
<br />
Instead, all that is said of the cult is that it is so harmless and pure. I have tried posting my concerns on the Wikipedia discussions page in recent days. My posts were deleted within minutes of submitting. This is frightening in that there are some individuals who rely on Wikipedia, for good or for ill, as a reliable source of information.<br />
==DOMA and Prop 8==<br />
Quick FYI. by law, in a FEDERAL government like ours, the definition of marriage is for the states to do, as it should be. Some states allow girls to marry at 14, others at 16, and others at 18. some states have the same ages for boys to marry as for girls. Still other states they are different ages. As a conservative, it's important to me that the Federal government does not overstep its authority to regulate things and become "big government". (this comment, by the way, has nothing to do with the prop 8 election which is exactly where this issue belongs. in the hands of the '''voters''' of each state! (ie, not the COURTs which like to step in)--[[User:JeanJacques|JeanJacques]] 15:39, 23 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: JeanJacques, you're entitled to your opinion, but your preface "as a conservative" is misplaced. The overwhelming percentage of conservatives do support DOMA. What's next, for you to say that "as a conservative" you're "pro-choice"?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:19, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Pope XIII? ==<br />
<br />
Isn't that just simple vandalism? Vandalism ''you could have fixed'' instead of rambling here about how Wikipedia professes hatred by mockingly creating pages linking to him? --[[User:AlanS|AlanS]] 18:14, 25 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
Is it vandalism? How can we be so sure about that noncited accusation of AlanS? 'I could have changed', I wouldn't contribute to them if you paid me. It is a pattern, ranked too darn high (no. 3), must have been there along time with the help of enabler and collaborator Google. Just change it, just vandalism Alan says. --'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 18:25, 25 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:I think he meant it was vandalism at WP, not here. It seems to be a bunch of non-registered user who keep vandalizing it, but people seem to change it back often. As for not contributing, well, I suppose the "light a candle or curse the darkness" quote kind of applies. We probably shouldn't cite the WP article itself, since it doesn't always support the point. Maybe cite one of the differences instead? [[User:LiamG|LiamG]] 18:37, 25 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
: It was there all of nine days, as one can easily see from the history. That is not "along [sic] time". It's nothing more than vandalism of the Wikipedia redirect. And AlanS is right: you ''could'' have fixed it. That you ''choose'' not to doesn't change that fact. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:22, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:: We've discussed how Wikipedia will leave up some "vandalism", while reverting others. It's an example of Wikipedia's bias how some vandalism will remain while others are reverted immediately. You can bet many editors saw that edit during the nine days it remained, and left it there. It's irrelevant whether an outsider could have reverted it; the point here is to illustrate the bias of the editors who run Wikipedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:17, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
::: It was a redirect page. Very few editors have redirect pages on their watchlist. Vandalism to a redirect page could go unnoticed for some time. Furthermore, it was vandalism by an IP, so there is no basis for saying that the editors who "run" Wikipedia had anything to do with it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 09:29, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::: Many editors in control of Wikipedia watch the recent changes and revert nearly all vandalism immediately. But as this (and other) examples illustrate, some liberal vandalism is left unreverted by those editors.<br />
<br />
:::: This is a clear example of liberal bias at Wikipedia. Admittedly, bias-by-omission is slightly more abstract than bias-by-action, but the point is precisely the same and it's a mistake to exclude this type of illustration of liberal bias.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:12, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
::::: I didn't realise that Superman was an editor in control of Wikipedia. In about the last four minutes, there's been about 500 changes to Wikipedia (about two edits per second) so I have trouble understanding how they could possibly even read the recent changes list, let alone check out every edit. So no, although I totally agree that there is "liberal" bias at Wikipedia, this is not a clear example of it. On the contrary, it's a lousy example of it. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:31, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:::::Update, somebody changed Bill Oreilly/ Wikipedia link on Google. Still listed number three, still providing a link url of Pope Pius, still linking to Bill's article. Page title changed to Bill Oreilly instead Pope Pius. Still disrespectful, if somebody corrects I can monitor if it returns.--'''<font color="#6698FF">J</font><font color="#E41B17">p</font><font color="#F88017">a</font><font color="#347C17">t</font><font color="#A74AC7">t</font>'''<sup>[[User:Jpatt| ]]</sup> 21:14, 28 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:::::: I don't think that's changed at all. Google indexing entries are created automatically; they don't have people changing them manually (well, not for 99.9999% of them). The Google cache shows that it was indexed on 22nd October, during the time Wikipedia's redirect page pointed to Bill Oreilly, which was the case before, so although I don't recall the actually date of it before, I'd say it hasn't changed at all. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:34, 29 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== If you think wikipedia is biased towards liberals... ==<br />
<br />
Why don't you work to fix it? It's nobody's fault but your own, because instead of actively going out and making changes to wikipedia (which is the point of wikipedia), you just sit on your [] and complain about it.<br />
[[User:Bibendum|Bibendum]] 21:37, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:That has been asked and answered numerous times on this page, I believe. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 21:40, 26 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:Because I'm feeling helpful, and I just had this same question: here's a thread from the archives that might shed some light: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia/Archive6#Take_a_step_back]. Enjoy! --[[User:Xanthippe|Xanthippe]] 00:02, 27 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
::Thanks, I knew it was there somewhere. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 00:12, 27 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== 'Chain of being' ==<br />
<br />
<s>RodWeathers reinstated the 'consciousness' entry with the edit comment "''Evolution requires a 'chain of being,' including varying consciousness''". I would like to know what this means and how it addresses the concerns with this entry already explained earlier on this page. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:36, 29 October 2008 (EDT)</s><br />
<br />
: Philip, did you post this here by accident?--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:46, 29 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
:: Ummm, yep. It should have been on the [[Talk:Counterexamples to Evolution]] page. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 01:31, 30 October 2008 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
== Fairness ==<br />
<br />
<br />
If there is a page on bias on Wikipedia, than why isn't there something similar on Conservapedia? One of your sysops admitted that Conservapedia has a conservative bias. If this site is to be trustworthy and unbiased, there should be such a page.--[[User:DM333|DM333]] 20:53, 10 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
== NAS ==<br />
Articles associated with the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_Scholars "National Association of Scholars"] are often a target of bias from [[liberal]] tag-team gangs. Ever since I read his book [http://books.google.com/books?id=NN7E3r_w09IC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Myth+of+the+scientific+method&ei=iehDSf6nCY3WlQSNkdjGDg ''...the Myth of the Scientific Method''], I've always had a great deal of respect for the author/scientist [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_H._Bauer Henry H. Bauer]. The Bauer page is one example of an article associated with NAS on wikipedia. Others can be found by looking through the links to the Bauer and to NAS articles: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Henry_H._Bauer&limit=500] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/National_Association_of_Scholars&limit=500]. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 12:01, 13 December 2008 (EST)<br />
::Here's a link to a much earlier version of the NAS article right before it was mauled by [[liberal]]s: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Association_of_Scholars&diff=202363151&oldid=202337351 "National Association of Scholars" (unbiased)] --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 13:59, 13 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
== What Lies by Wikipedia about Conservapedia? ==<br />
<br />
according to the first entry; "Wikipedia's entry about Conservapedia contains four unsupported smears in its very first sentence"<br />
<br />
what are the "Four Unsupported Smears"? I read the first sentence, and it seems reasonable to me.<br />
<br />
: If you don't see the smears, then I'm afraid that is most informative about your viewpoint.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 18:12, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::I don't really agree. the first sentence contains statements of fact. YEC, american etc. I don't wee what is a smear about that. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] <small>(CPAdmin1)</small><sup>[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]]</sup> <sup>[[User:CPAdmin1/Polls|Vote in my NEW polls]]</sup> 20:08, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::: The four terms in the first sentence are pejorative, particularly with respect to Wikipedia's audience. "right-wing"??? Please. The first sentence is also unsupported and unjustified, and thereby violates Wikipedia's own rules. We do not impose a point of view here.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 20:25, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
::::"''Conservapedia is an English-language wiki-based web encyclopedia project written from a young earth creationist, Americentric, right-wing and Conservative Christian point of view.''" Lets review the claims.<br />
::::1. English Language -- true<br />
::::2. wiki based -- true<br />
::::3. Web encyclopedia project -- true<br />
::::4. Young Earth Creationist -- We at least support the YEC position<br />
::::5. Americentric -- maybe.<br />
::::6. right-wing -- I think so. If we created a visual representation of the political spectrum, where would CP land?<br />
::::7. Conservative Christian --I don't see this one as a negative, and if we aren't then we should be.<br />
::::The claims may or may not be strictly true, but I think that from the outside, they appear to be.<br />
::::What about the POV that Obama is a muslim? we impose that one pretty strictly. --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] <small>(CPAdmin1)</small><sup>[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]]</sup> <sup>[[User:CPAdmin1/Polls|Vote in my NEW polls]]</sup> 20:59, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
:::::Apart from the negative tone of the wikipedia lede (lead), it misses the mark. The connotation is off. Happens a lot with wikipedia articles. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 21:18, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
:::::In furtherance of Rick's observation, Tim, you apparently misunderstand this project and do not describe it accurately. We provide the truth and do not "impose" any point of view. If you can find any statement by me, or other Bureaucrat, or even senior Admin, that supports your claims above (#4-7), then I'd like to see it. I don't think it exists, and Wikipedia offers no support for its smear. I suggest you retract your unsupported claims, just as Wikipedia should.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:40, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
::::::Schlafly, if Conservapedia is not right-wing, what is it? I'm actually really confused right now. [[User:SJames|SJames]] 19:56, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::: Wikipedia doesn't say that "Conservapedia" is a "conservative encyclopedia" as the name suggests. Instead, Wikipedia tries to smear Conservapedia with unjustified, pejorative terms that is ''not'' representative of the name, the rules, or the content. This is a clear example of how Wikipedia does insist on a liberal and unsupported POV to smear people. See the main page for yet another recent example.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 21:16, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::::::What is the difference between being conservative and being right-wing? Its seems this site uses Liberal and Left-wing pretty much interchangeably, I would assume that right and left refer to the political spectrum. --[[User:TuckerM|TuckerM]] 21:21, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
:::::::SJames, you'd do yourself a favor if you opened your mind and learned from this site. 2+2=4 is not "right wing," and neither is the truth you'll find here. But you have free will to deny both, so suit yourself.--[[User:Aschlafly|aschlafly]] 20:35, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::::Not to worry, my mind is open. I understand right-wing may incorporate some of the far-right extremists, but to me, the terminology in itself carries no negative connotations. It's just reference to one half of the political spectrum. It's like the Boston Celtics objecting to being referred to as an "Eastern Conference team" because they don't want to be associated with the likes of the Charlotte Bobcats or the general inferiority of the Eastern Conference (though this year has been different!). My point is that there is no need to be defensive about it. If people ask me, "Are your beliefs on the right-wing?", I'll answer without taking offense, "Yes" and then clarify, "--Conservative Christian". [[User:SJames|SJames]] 14:53, 16 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
:::::::I personally dont find the words wikipedia uses inaccurate (they are most certainly true), and i really feel the words there have negative connotations (nothing negative in right-wing to me or the others) but thats certainly subjective. --[[User:PMichael|PMichael]] 21:01, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::::I'm curious now too: ''why is it'' called Conservapedia then? '''[[user:FernoKlump|<font color="#000066" >FernoKlump</font>]]'''<sup>[[User:FernoKlump/petition|<font color="#bd2433" >Mr. Schlafly! Look at this petition!]]</font></sup> 20:58, 15 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
::::::You Don't try to impose any Point of View? Thats Funny, because I had stuff deleted on here earlier and was temporarily blocked from editing. <br />
::::::And I don't get what you are saying is misleading or smearing in there? Are you trying to argue that this wiki isn't from a Right-wing, Conservative Christian, YEC and Americentric Point of View? Its called CONSERVAPEDIA for Allah's Sake! That was the point I was trying to get across in the beginning from asking this question, not to be a jerk and get my stuff deleted and banned or whatever. --[[User:PatF|PatF]] 22:11, 14 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
==Lawrence Solomon==<br />
Lawrence Solomon, the author of the 2008 book [[The Deniers]], wrote back in April 2008 an editorial piece titled [http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2008/4/18/hide-your-name-on-wicked-pedia-solomon.aspx "Hide your name on Wicked Pedia: Solomon"] about what newcomers to wikipedia should expect when they try to correct [[liberal]] bias. His experience was not pleasant. --[[User:RickD|RickD]] 12:18, 16 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
<br />
==Article on Biblical Criticism==<br />
In wikipedia's article on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_criticism Biblical Criticism] the [[Oxford Univeristy]]-Press-published referenced section regarding those who are interested in biblical criticism and hold to supernatural beliefs was removed. The phrasing of supernatural beliefs came from the [[Oxford University]] Press-Published book. Despite claims that removing well-referenced material is unacceptable, it has not been restored. It is clear that wikipedia does not enforce its "policies" on references. See here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Biblical_criticism&diff=259607288&oldid=259533753] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Biblical_criticism&diff=259236232&oldid=259205856].--[[User:RickD|RickD]] 22:28, 24 December 2008 (EST)<br />
<br />
== I deleted "Wikipedia makes no mention of the fact that Eric Holder..." ==<br />
<br />
I deleted "Wikipedia makes no mention of the fact that [[Obama]]'s Attorney General [[Eric Holder]] called the United States a "nation of cowards" when it comes to the discussion of race."<br />
<br />
The citation was a link to an old revision of a Wikipedia page. The new revision DOES mention this. --[[User:Andrew1123|Andrew1123]] 17:22, 8 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
==Reference Needed for Claim that Wikipedia Called Bush a Nazi==<br />
<br />
The claim that G. W. Bush "was called a supporter of the Nazi regime" on his wikipedia page is very believable, but could someone find a reference proving it? [[User:Sjay|Sjay]] 20:50, 9 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Is #150 really relevant? (The criticism of GWB/BHO) ==<br />
<br />
Looking back at the history of the "Presidency of George W. Bush" article, the Criticism section was not added to the article until July 5th, 2006. If Wikipedia had a liberal bias wouldn't they have added that much sooner? BHO has been in power for less then two months, not enough time to form a valid criticism of his presidency as a whole.<br />
<br />
:I'm sorry - and you are?<br />
::20:34, March 9, 2009 Dparker (Talk | contribs | block) New user <br />
::20:44, March 9, 2009 (hist) (diff) Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (→Is #150 really relavent? (The criticism of GWB/BHO): new section) <br />
:Do you have any interest here other than this issue?<br />
:Anyway, to answer your question, the articles are not simply about criticism of the men as they acted as president. They are about them in general. B.O. has been around quite a while before January 20, 2009. Was there no criticism of him before that date? Has there been no criticism of him after it? And what, pray tell, defines criticism as "valid" or not and what is the official figure for how much time must pass for the criticism to be worthy of Wikipedia? I mean, is criticism of George W. Bush's personality - his ''personality'' for crying out loud! - valid? This is a ridiculous line from the ridiculous WP article:<br />
:<blockquote>"Raised in West Texas, Bush's accent, vacations on his Texas ranch, and penchant for country metaphors contribute to his folksy, American cowboy image, which occasionally served as fodder for criticism."</blockquote><br />
:Oh, my dear Lord in Heaven, NOOOOOO!!!! His accent! His ranch! His metaphors! Why did we ever let such a man be president with all these valid criticisms?! Chimpeachment!<br />
:Okay, I freely admit that was gratuitous sarcasm, but it sure felt good.<br />
:Bottom line: the excuses people are putting forth to excuse the blatant B.O. worship and kowtowing on WP are lame and don't hold water. I know it. You know it. Everyone knows it. [[User:Jinxmchue|Jinxmchue]] 00:28, 16 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
The WP articles are referenced in the "example of bias" are "Presidency of" articles, not general articles. You would know if you read them. But I guess reading an article on a site with a "liberal bias" is a lot to expect from someone here. Laying the sarcasm so thick isn't helping your argument either. If you think that line is so ridiculous then you've obviously blocked out the last eight years from your memory, not to mention that his attitude is probably the weakest criticism anyone has of GWB. Also, it should be mentioned that if that page on WP is ridiculous, then how do you describe this: [[Religion of Barack Obama]]. The rabbit hole of crazy goes really deep here.<br />
<br />
: Your unsigned comment is incoherent. But in answer to your question, it is biased to point of absurdity to criticize Bush for his "accent" and his "ranch". Do you see similar criticisms of Obama and Ted Kennedy on Wikipedia???--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:13, 16 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Gothic architecture ==<br />
<br />
I am confused by the entry. It is maybe linked to the wrong wikipedia article? Because right now anyway, the article "Gothic Architecture" has its whole 3rd paragraph, out of 5 in the introduction section, about churches and cathedrals. And after that, there is the section "Religious influences" which is talking about christian monastary orders. Then it does mention moslems but only to say that their architecture had pointed arches, and i agree this is bias because there is no reason to think christians did not invent pointed arches themselves, but i still think that the entry bullet point makes little sense. The article mentions christianty in the third paragraph, after maybe 100 words not 1 500. It credits Christianity first and not moslems. It mentions christians many times through out, not "never mentioning christianity again." I am not saying it is unbiased but what we say about it is incorrect in fact. And it is strange to open with this, too. The list should start with the worst, like the black-list on intelligent design and climate sceptics, the celebirty gossip, and then on. [[User:ELeger|ELeger]] 00:24, 27 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== DRUDGE BIAS ==<br />
<br />
I don't have the time now but will somebody compare (and post a summary of) the existing Wikipedia DRUDGE REPORT and MATT DRUDGE entries with the existing Wikipedia entries for BILL MAHER, ARIANNA HUFFINGTON, and KEITH OLBERMANN? You will see that the DR and Matt Drudge, '''news aggregators,''' are cited in the first sentence as "conservative" while no such labels are applied to the latter '''pundits''' in even the first paragraph. Instead, they are buried well down the page or omitted entirely. In fact, it was the case recently that none were objectively called liberals but instead made use of sleight of hand, e.g., saying they had been critical of certain right-wingers at certain times, but not mentioning that they were proudly liberal. Good example of Wiki bias, in my estimation.<br />
<br />
: You're right. Thanks for your insight. Please add a point about this, or I will if you don't get around to it.<br />
<br />
Personally, whilst I don't disagree as such with your observations, there is still an element of bias in them as well. You have cited just 3 'liberal' examples against 2 'conservative' examples. Who's to say there aren't others on each side which in fact show the opposite to what these do. It seems highly selective to select these few for comparison. The Michael Moore article for example does state in the opening that he is a 'liberal', so basically I think you would have to see how wide ranging this is before calling it bias. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 18:59, 28 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Organizing instances in order of severity? ==<br />
<br />
While I don't really agree with the comment about "Gothic Architecture" above, the author may have a point: would it be better to list the most egregious examples of bias first? Perhaps have a section for the most blatant instances of bias, and then a section for other instances? It just seems like good common sense to present the strongest arguments first. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 18:00, 27 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Thank you ==<br />
<br />
Dear Conservapedia editors<br />
<br />
Firstly, I would like to disclose that I am a regular Wikipedia editor. I wanted to thank this site for this particular article. I regularly review it for errors Wikipedia might have missed, and whilst I don't agree that every complaint raised in this article is valid, a reasonable number have proven to be correct. This site, and I wish to stress I don't agree with a lot of it, does serve as a watchdog which many Wikipedia editors value for its investigations, and helps to keep us on our toes. Thanks again. [[User:Breithaupt|Breithaupt]] 14:52, 28 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
:Thank you! No place is immune from the benefits of "outside" eyes, offering suggestions or solutions. --[[User:TK|'''₮K''']]<sub><small><small>/Admin</small></small></sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 15:57, 28 March 2009 (EDT)<br />
<br />
== Thank you as well! ==<br />
<br />
:Thank you as well! I am sure that a growing number of contributors to Wikipedia are beginning to rethink their alleged objectivity and purveyors of unfettered information in a quest for the unvarnished truth, as well as a genuine effort "to present all sides" in a so-called fair manner, especially when "fairness" is tangible and wholly subjective in a multitude of cases. Their editorial staff once seemed to be the paragon of inclusion; now, an increasingly harsh tone of what cannot but be considered pious liberal subterfuge seems to confront the participant. Indeed, the forbearance manifested by the editors of Conservapedia - apparently from editors secure in their own intellect and the resilience of their faith - is a most nonthreatening and refreshing antithesis to those of us who have been savaged by an ever-noxious and insipid constriction of the truth or, as said, objectivity of the presentation. What one unfortunately faces on WP is a sort of editorial goon squad set about to investigate the alleged self-serving proprieties of them who deign to taint their presuppositions--tragic denial of their quest for greater information. I see in the current socio-religious (and socio-political) culture wars which currently afflict this nation a most disturbing phenomenon played out in the generation of information made available to the masses through the internet: The war of words and information waged between what appears to be an encroaching governmental superiority vs. the rights of man. If we are not careful, that which we feared the most shall come upon us--God help us all if the truth that sets us free is submerged in the blather of the self-righteous platitudes of so-called progressives whose purposeful and/or inadvertent desire is to manifest their disdain of any and all absolutes (especially those which the faithful project) - and in so doing, descend to a most horrible absolute wherein truth becomes fiction and fiction becomes the truth. The matter astounds - they who profess such indignity toward personal aggrandizement are countered (thankfully) by the accused who embrace their absolutes with calm and persistent expression of unfettered information which irritates the so-called guardians of information. Keep up the good work!</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645839Antichrist2009-03-29T01:16:54Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog)<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology)| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18:1-24. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645838Antichrist2009-03-29T01:16:20Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology)| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18:1-24. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645836Antichrist2009-03-29T01:15:09Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18:1-24. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645831Antichrist2009-03-29T01:11:44Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51<ref>{{cite web| title=Jeremiah 50-51| url=http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050-51%20;&version=50;| publisher=New King James Bible}}</ref> and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645822Antichrist2009-03-29T01:05:59Z<p>Kriegerdwm: </p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in Premillennialism<ref>{{cite web| title=Premillennialism| url=http://www.theopedia.com/Premillennialism| publisher=Theopedia, an Encyclopedia of Biblical Christianity}}</ref> will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645811Antichrist2009-03-29T01:00:30Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* The Antichrist in the Bible */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645810Antichrist2009-03-29T00:59:50Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* The Antichrist in the Bible */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>{{cie web| title=Antichrist| url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm| publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> So while there is a spirit of antichrist, there is also one Antichrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some interpretations considered equivalent to, ''the Beast'' of Revelation or the ''Man of Sin'' referenced in II Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645809Antichrist2009-03-29T00:53:48Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with his nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645808Antichrist2009-03-29T00:52:04Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with the nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, Moody Church, Chicago, Illinois| publisher=Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645805Antichrist2009-03-29T00:49:16Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with the nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us|title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy}} (''U.S. in Bible Prophecy'', by S. Franklin Logsdon, Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, [[Moody Church]]}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of ''the Beast'' in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself who will parody the resurrection of Jesus; thereafter, he is entitled ''the Beast''. Therefore, [[Satan]] will not only desecrate a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] by declaring himself as God in the Temple of God but he will desecrate the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into [[Judas]]" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled ''The Son of Perdition'' (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645804Antichrist2009-03-29T00:45:23Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* America as the Seat of Antichrist */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with the nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog}<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref> appears to be an integral part of Americana.<br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us|title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy}} (''U.S. in Bible Prophecy'', by S. Franklin Logsdon, Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, [[Moody Church]]}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of the Beast in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself; thereafter, he is entitled the Beast. Therefore, not only desecrating a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] but desecrating the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into Judas" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled "The Son of Perdition" (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645803Antichrist2009-03-29T00:42:17Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Resources */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with the nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref><br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us|title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy}} (''U.S. in Bible Prophecy'', by S. Franklin Logsdon, Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, [[Moody Church]]}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of the Beast in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself; thereafter, he is entitled the Beast. Therefore, not only desecrating a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] but desecrating the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into Judas" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled "The Son of Perdition" (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645802Antichrist2009-03-29T00:41:01Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* References */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with the nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref><br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us|title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy}} (''U.S. in Bible Prophecy'', by S. Franklin Logsdon, Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, [[Moody Church]]}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of the Beast in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself; thereafter, he is entitled the Beast. Therefore, not only desecrating a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] but desecrating the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into Judas" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled "The Son of Perdition" (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645801Antichrist2009-03-29T00:40:42Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* References */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with the nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref><br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us|title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy}} (''U.S. in Bible Prophecy'', by S. Franklin Logsdon, Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, [[Moody Church]]}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of the Beast in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself; thereafter, he is entitled the Beast. Therefore, not only desecrating a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] but desecrating the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into Judas" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled "The Son of Perdition" (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
==Resources==<br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=645800Abomination of Desolation2009-03-29T00:38:24Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* See Also */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks{{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}. Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9;27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast''' (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) <br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645799Antichrist2009-03-29T00:36:32Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* References */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with the nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref><br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us|title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy}} (''U.S. in Bible Prophecy'', by S. Franklin Logsdon, Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, [[Moody Church]]}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of the Beast in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself; thereafter, he is entitled the Beast. Therefore, not only desecrating a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] but desecrating the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into Judas" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled "The Son of Perdition" (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
=References=<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<References/><br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645798Antichrist2009-03-29T00:36:03Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Islam */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as Dajjal<ref>{{cite web| title=Who is the evil Dajjal (the "anti-Christ")? - from ''Signs of Qiyamah''| url=http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/masdaj.html| author=Mohammed Ali Ibn Zubair Ali}}</ref><br />
<br />
==America as the Seat of Antichrist==<br />
America as the "Seat of Antichrist" ''ipso facto'' the leader of the West, namely, the President of the United States, as the Antichrist, with the nation as the ultimate Beast Nation or Babylon the Great - the great end times' commercial citadel spoken of in Revelation 18, has increasingly become the topic of conversation around the prophetic tables, not only in America, but increasingly throughout the world. A simple search for "Obama as the Antichrist" will generate scores of blogs, books, magazine articles, etc. America's fascination of this elusive, but ever-forecasted personage to appear in the "Latter Days" (according to Christians who hold to a Futurism eschatolog<ref>{{cite web| title=Futurism (Christian eschatology| url=http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Futurism_(Christian_eschatology)| publisher=Absolute Astronomy.com}}</ref><br />
<br />
The seat of Antichrist as the USA is not a new interpretation among Christians, even among those who profess no faith. The United States in Bible Prophecy as the two-horned beast in Revelation 13:11-17 (i.e., the second beast of Revelation 13:1 who supports ''the Beast'' (i.e., the Antichrist) was propounded in 1859 by Frances Rolleston who authored a work titled ''Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: The Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Out''.<ref>{{cite web| title=Notes on the Apocalypse, as Explained by the Hebrew Scriptures: the Place in Prophecy of America and Australia Being Pointed Outurl| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=IXoaAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA1293&lpg=PA1293&dq=Frances+Rolleston+The+Place+in+Prophecy+of+America+and+Australia+Being+Pointed+Out&source=bl&ots=ziK45_MuIm&sig=qG5DgNL7ag6fMQ4K5IHBaC4h94U&hl=en&ei=KKrFScveGZmMsQPi9dkk&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA1294,M1| publisher=Rivingtons, London 1858}}</ref> [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] expositor Uriah Smith in 1884 authored a text entitled ''The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17''<ref>{{cite web| title=The United States in the Light of Prophecy; or, An Exposition of Rev. 13:11-17| url=http://www.books.google.com/books?id=0dziN9QI3SgC&dq=The+United+States+in+the+Light+of+Prophecy%3B+or,+An+Exposition+of+Rev.+13:11-17&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=6-CGmRJvUX&sig=iD-5yIDPNhHfMz9trznrpc2W9AI&hl=en&ei=POHFSeOwDIKqsAPK18X9Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result| author|Uriah Smith}}</ref> Smith was insistent that America was the beast of Revelation 13:11-17. However, it was not until 1968 when Dr. S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor of the Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, who suggested that the USA was Babylon the Great.<ref>{{cite web| title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:tN8J-JOJDS8J:www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/specol/news/fundamentalism/+U.S.+in+Bible+Prophecy+Logsdon+Armageddon+Books&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us|title=U.S. in Bible Prophecy}} (''U.S. in Bible Prophecy'', by S. Franklin Logsdon, Zondervan, 1968, pp. 59-60, ISBN-10:0974476498| author=S. Franklin Logsdon, Sr. Pastor, [[Moody Church]]}}</ref> Jack Van Impe<ref>{{cite web| title=Jack Van Impe Ministries International| url=http://www.jvim.com/}}</ref> in ''The Great Escape''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Great Escape| url=http://www.e316.com/Great-Escape-Jack-Van-Impe/0849940737.htm| author=Jack Van Impe| publisher=Word, Nashville: Nashville, 1998, pp. 206-7, ISBN: 0849940737}}</ref> indicts America as the fulfillment of Jeremiah 50-51 and Revelation 18. In one of the more exhaustive indictments against America as the seat of Antichrist, R. A. Coombes, in ''America, the Babylon: America’s Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy''<ref>{{cite web| title=America the Babylon| url=http://www.americathebabylon.com/| author=R. A. Coombes| publisher=Real Publishing, Liberty, 1998; especially pp. 55-58 and 182-86, ISBN 1-890622-33-8}}</ref> presents thirty-three identifying markers which he claims identify America as the Babylon of the End Times, the seat of Antichrist; also, Coombes lists sixty-six points in another segment of his text (pp. 182-86) in which New York City is the perfect bastion of Babylon the Great. <br />
<br />
Mark Hitchcock, in his 2009 text, ''The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days''<ref>{{cite web| title=The Late Great United States, What Bible Prophecy Reveals About America's Last Days| url=http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9781601421401| author=Mark Hitchcock| publisher=Multnomah Books, Colorado Springs, CO, 2009, pp. 17-21, ISBN 978-1-60142-140-1}}</ref> rejects the eschatologists who suggest that America is ''Mystery, Babylon the Great'' (Revelation 17:5) and claims, instead, that modern-day [[Iraq]] is the literal Babylon the Great of the latter days (pp. 17-21). Scores of authors now flood the American apocalyptic marketplace with America’s role in Bible prophecy and most tie in the final Antichrist as the leader of that proposition.<ref>{{cite web| title=America in Prophecy - Contemporary American authors address America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/america.html}}</ref> Those Evangelicals who dispute America’s role as the Babylon of the Last Days, and as the seat of Antichrist, have been resisted by the likes of John Walvoord<ref>{{cite web| title=Walvoord| url=http://www.walvoordhistory.com/John%20F.%20Walvoord.html| author=Scott Anthony Walvoord}}</ref> of Dallas Theological Seminary<ref>{{cite web| title=Dallas Theological Seminary (Home Page)| url=http://www.dts.edu/}}</ref> and R. L. Hymers, Jr. of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle.<ref>{{cite web| title=The Fall of America in Bible Prophecy| url=http://www.rlhymersjr.com/Online_Sermons/2008/102608PM_AmericaInProphecy.html| author=R. L. Hymers of the Los Angeles Baptist Tabernacle}}</ref><br />
<br />
In his e-book ''Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| title=Antichrist - Reflections on the Desolator| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> Doug Krieger asserts that The Antichrist is not a Jew, the Pope, Islam nor a New-Age figure. Antichrist will be (according to Krieger) the leader of the West and the "protector of the Jews in a regathered Israel" - it is this figure who will make a "defense pact" to defend Israel's majority for seven years but, like other Biblical Futurists, will break his covenant with Israel and declare himself as "God, in the temple of God" (II Thessalonians 2:4). Also, Antichrist receives the Biblical entitlement of the Beast in the middle of Daniel's final 70th Week. This is accomplished when Antichrist receives "a wound in his head" - his body will then be entered into by Satan himself; thereafter, he is entitled the Beast. Therefore, not only desecrating a rebuilt [[Third Temple]] but desecrating the Antichrist's body (i.e., the "temple of man") and, as "Satan entered into Judas" to betray Jesus, he will enter into Antichrist - both Judas and Antichrist are entitled "The Son of Perdition" (John 17:12; II Thessalonians 2:3).<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<References/><br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Two_Witnesses&diff=645778Two Witnesses2009-03-28T23:31:56Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Religious-political ramifications of Israel and the Church */</p>
<hr />
<div>In Christian eschatology, the '''Two Witnesses''' are two individuals, concepts or "corporate beings" described in chapter 11 of the [[Book of Revelation]] in the events leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.<br />
{{cquote|<br />
"'And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.' These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth. And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner. these have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy; and they have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to strike the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire. When they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them. And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into the graves. And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth. Now after three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, 'Come up here.' And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them. In the same hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. In the earthquake seven thousand people were killed, and the rest were afraid and gave glory to the God of heaven." (Revelation 11:3-13 - New King James Version)}}<br />
<br />
==Identity==<br />
<br />
Growing interest in the identity of the two witnesses of Revelation 11 and the timing of their appearance, has inspired Eschatological debate for centuries.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wcg.org/lit/bible/Rev/2witnesses.htm |title=The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Kroll |first=Paul |year=1999 |publisher=Worldwide Church of God}}</ref> Are they two literal individuals or are they symbolic of a concept (e.g., the Old and New Testaments of the Bible<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tagnet.org/cyberspace/Lessons/Fut-057/fut1-057.html|title=If I Were Told the Future -- Lesson 57: The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |year=2002 |work=Cyberspace Ministry}}</ref>) or corporate entities which symbolize peoples? Are they here now<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/herenow.htm |title=Are The Two Witnesses Here Now? |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Blank |first=Wayne |work=Daily Bible Study |publisher=The Church of God}}</ref> if they are personified - or are they yet future, as millenarian [[Hal Lindsey]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:lQb5fAcu260J:www.raptureready.com/featured/HalLindsey.html+Hal+Lindsey+The+Two+Witnesses&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5|title=Hal Lindsey}}</ref> claims they are - ready to appear on the [[Apocalypse|apocalyptic]] scene, along with the [[Antichrist]]? Perhaps they represent the witnessing Church<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.apocalipsis.org/downloads/revelatn.pdf |title=Revelation: A Reference Commentary |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Taylor |first=R A |date=[[2000]]-[[03-17]] |format=PDF |pages=111-112}} </ref> since Jesus sent out his disciples "two by two".<ref>Mark 6:7.</ref> On the other hand, could they be some form of reincarnation<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.elevated.fsnet.co.uk/index-page14.html |title=Reincarnation and Christianity |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Millett |first=Michael G |work=Elevated Therapy International}}</ref> of Moses and Elijah<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=77&cuItem_itemID=14532|title=WELS Topical Q&A: Endtime/Prophecies Two Witnesses|accessdate=2007-06-26 |year=2007 |work=Communication Services |publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod}}</ref> because both of them were prophets; Moses<ref>Exodus 7:16-18.</ref> struck the waters of the Nile and they turned into blood; and Elijah<ref>1 Kings 17:1-7.</ref> commanded the heavens that it rained not and did so for three-and-one-half years.<ref>James 5:17.</ref> Indeed, the other witness may be Enoch<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.apocalypsesoon.org/xfile-11.html |title=Eight Good Reasons Why Enoch Must Be One of the Two Witnesses! |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Wunderlich |first=Bob |work=Apocalypse Soon: The Xcellent Files}}</ref> (i.e., Elijah and Enoch), because he, like Elijah "was taken"<ref>Hebrews 11:5.</ref> (i.e., did not suffer physical death). They could simply be two Jewish prophets (as the ''[[Left Behind]] Series'' claims<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.leftbehind.com/channelfree.asp?pageid=1284&channelID=175 |title=Who Are the Two Witnesses? |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=LaHaye |first=Tim, et al. |year=2004 |work=The Authorized Left Behind Handbook}}</ref>) who in the period of the 70th Week of Daniel (yet future or partial<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/m.sion/70wedan9.htm|title=Daniel 9:24-27|accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Amy |first=Stephen |work=Worship at the Altar}}</ref> come in the power of Moses and Elijah and are representative of the law (Moses) and the prophets (Elijah)).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://biblia.com/bible/rev11.htm |title=The Temple... and the Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Dominguez |first=J}}</ref> Indeed, some claim that the notion of a yet future 70th Week of Daniel is a Catholic (Jesuit) conspiracy<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.godssabbathtruth.com/sabbath-antichrist.html |title=The Great Catholic Diversion Revealed |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=2006 |work=Sabbath & Antichrist Truth Revealed |publisher=GodsSabbathTruth.com}}</ref> to take the heat off the papacy as the "seat of the antichrist system"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?2617&collectionID=795&contentID=4441&shortcutID=5297|title=Statement on the Antichrist |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=2007 |work=CICR: WELS Doctrinal Statements |publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod}}</ref> and to place the onus on a yet future and literal person who will be the incarnation of Satan himself<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thepropheticyears.com/The%20book%20of%20Revelation/Revelation%20Chapter%2017.htm |title=Revelation chapter 17 commentary |accessdate=2007-06-27 |last=Koenig |first=Don |year=2004 |work=The Revelation of Jesus Christ Through the Ages}}</ref> - who, as the beast will "make war against them, overcome them, and kill them"<ref>Revelation 11:7.</ref> -- hence, this prophecy of a future personification of "The Antichrist" is erroneous and has already been fulfilled<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/m.sion/da70fufu.htm |title=Daniel's 70th Week--Future or Fulfilled? |accessdate=2007-06-27 |publisher=Used by permission from Ralph Woodrow}}</ref> in history. To be certain - Roman Catholic eschatology affirms the coming of the Antichrist.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm |title=Antichrist |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=1907 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref><br />
<br />
Their description as "two olive trees and two lampstands"<ref>Revelation 11:4.</ref> is taken as symbolism and/or allegorical. This [[Hermeneutics|hermeneutical]] approach to the Bible is adjudged by some as "hyper-allegorical"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07303b.htm |title=Hesychius of Jerusalem |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=1907 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> juxtaposed to a more "[[Biblical literalism|literal"]] interpretation; however, those who adhere to a Christian fundamentalist reading of the Bible (i.e., [[Biblical inerrancy|inerrancy]]) do not find common ground on the exposition of the identity of these Two Witnesses. Through commentary and exposition<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.preceptaustin.org/tool_commentary.htm |title=Bible Commentaries |accessdate=2007-06-27 |date=[[2007]]-[[06-07]] |publisher=Precept Austin}}</ref> the Two Witnesses could be considered as both symbolic and as literal (i.e., representative of peoples). Controversy over the symbolic, as well as literal interpretations of the Two Witnesses, as Israel<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/two_witnesses.htm |title=Israel and the Church as the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11 and Daniel 12 |accessdate=2007-06-29 |publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (the "two olive trees") and the Church (the "two lampstands") creates a great deal of eschatological debate<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/lasttrumpet_2000/debate_1a.html |title=Dichotomy or Continuity Between the Present and Past Dispensations: Opening Argument |accessdate=2007-06-29 |last=Warner |first=Tim |date=[[2002]]-[[08-07]] |work=Progressive Dispensationalism: Debate Between Dr. Mal Couch & Tim Warner |publisher=Conservative Theological Society}}</ref> between strict Dispensationalists and Progressive Dispensationalists;<ref name="warner-intro">{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/~lasttrumpet/ |title=Introduction & Methodology |accessdate=2007-06-29 |last=Warner |first=Tim |date= |year=2002 |month=November |work=The Last Trumpet |publisher=Post-Trib Research Center}}</ref> whereas such debate may be considered as non sequitur insofar as [[Preterism|Preterists]] and Historicists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.historicism.net/ |title=Historicism Research Foundation |accessdate=2006-06-30}}</ref> whose views of the Two Witnesses place them outside the chronological timeline (70 AD for Preterists)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.preterist.org/whatispreterism.asp |title=What is the Preterist View of Bible Prophecy? |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=2007 |publisher=International Preterist Association}}</ref> or wholly in the realm of the symbolic - relegated to the Church only in any future unfolding of prophecy as seen by many Historicists.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.historicism.com/Haynes/2witness.htm |title=The Meaning of the "Two Witnesses" |accessdate=2007-06-30 |last=Haynes |first=J. L |work=Historicism.com}}</ref><br />
<br />
Views among those who adhere to a literal one-thousand years [[Premillennialism|premillennial]] earthly kingdom (i.e., the millennium is yet future) complicate the Church's participation in the 70th Week of Daniel (i.e., yet future). The three dominant positions among these Premillenarians (be they evangelical,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wheaton.edu/isae/defining_evangelicalism.html |title=Defining Evangelicalism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=2005 |month=April |publisher=Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals}}</ref> Catholic<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10307a.htm |title=Millennium and Millenarianism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=1911 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> or Orthodox<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:F7d0BUBkjf4J:www.conservativeonline.org/journals/02_04_journal/1998v2n4_id02.htm+Early+Church+Fathers+Millenarians&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1 |title=The Early Church Fathers and the Foundations of Dispensationalism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |last=Crutchfield |first=Larry V}}</ref> Christians - and for that matter, among other Christian sects)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=21209 |title=Christian Millenarianism/Indiana University Press |accessdate=2007-06-30}}</ref> regarding the final 70th Week of Daniel insofar as the Church's participation concerns are: Pretribulational<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/rr-pretribulation-rapture.html |title=The Pretribulation Rapture |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Strandberg |first=Todd |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> (the Church will rapture<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/search-results.php?author=3&related=true |title=Other articles by Dr. Thomas Ice |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |year=2003 |publisher=Pre-Trib Research Center}}</ref> at the commencement of the 70th Week of Daniel),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://jesus-is-the-way.com/RevOutline.html |title=Outline and Chronology of Endtimes in the Book of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-19 |date=[[2007]]-[[05-27]]|work=Jesus-is-the-way.com}}</ref> whose commencement is normally announced by the infamous "Treaty of Hell and Death"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gotlinks.com/earticles/articles/107731-your-covenant-with-death___your-agreement-with-hell___the-u_s_-israel-strategic-alliance.html |title=Your Covenant with Death...Your Agreement With Hell...The U.S.-Israel Strategic Alliance |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Krieger |first=Doug |date=[[2005]]-[[12-25]]}}</ref> (i.e., the treaty or "defense pact" of the Antichrist with Israel);<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/pdf/Ice-TheIsraeliElections.pdf |title=The Israeli Elections |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |format=PDF |work=Pre-trib.org}}</ref> Mid-Tribulational<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nobts.edu/Faculty/ItoR/LemkeSW/Personal/midtribulationism.html |title=The Biblical Case for Mid-Tribulationalism |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Lemke |first=Steve W}} </ref> or "Pre-Wrath"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/athens/forum/5951/prewrath.html |title=A review of the Pre-Wrath rapture of the Church |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Stanton |first=Gerald B}}</ref> (the Church will be raptured in the middle of Daniel's 70th Week - i.e., after approximately three-and-one-half years); and Post-Tribulational<ref name="warner-intro"/> (the Church will be raptured will take place at the end of the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.intergate.com/~subi/linksecc.htm |title=The Return of Jesus Christ |accessdate=2007-08-23}}</ref> just prior to the "wrath of God"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0026.html |title=Are the seals of Revelation 6 the wrath of God? |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Lee-Warner |first=Bill |work=Sola Scriptura}}</ref> or "wrath of the Lamb").<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/worldview_3/2prewrath.html |title=The "Pre-Wrath Rapture Teaching" Evaluated |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Totten |first=Rhett |year=1999 |work=The Second Coming of Christ and Rapture Site}}</ref> Some theologians believe that the two olive branches represent the peace on Earth that the witnesses try to bring to the sinful Earth, and the two lampstands represent the light for Christ that they shine for Christ. <br />
<br />
Post-Tribulational icon Dr. Robert H. Gundry (Westmont College) states in his classic, ''The Church and the Tribulation'',<ref>ISBN 978-0310254010</ref> especially in reference to Post-tribulationalism and the identity of the Two Witnesses - having both the Church and Israel throughout the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy presents formidable eschatological challenges to wit:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“If the Church is to go through the tribulation, God will work simultaneously with two groups of covenant people, Israel and the Church. Millenarians of all varieties, including pretribulationists, should find the possibility of such simultaneous workings hard to deny . . . But it is not merely a matter of dealing with two groups at once. It is a matter of dealing simultaneously with, and through, two groups of redeemed people and witnesses. Will two diverse groups of saints, those who belong to the Church and those who belong to Israel coexist on earth and perhaps live according to different regulations? If so, will the tribulational Church be composed exclusively of Gentile believers? Will two distinct companies of witnesses preach the Gospel, maybe variations of it? Such questions arise quite naturally if we take the tribulation as transitional. But the mere existence of these questions does not preclude the possibility of the presence of the Church in the tribulation.” (''The Church and the Tribulation'', Robert H. Gundry, Zondervan Publishing House, 1973, p. 23).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
What Gundry suggests is anathema to strict Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/disp/disp2.html |title=Dispensationalism and its errors Part 2 |accessdate=2007-08-23 |work=Sean's Faith Website}}</ref> whose pre-tribulationalism demands a complete separation of the Church from Israel<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.reformationtheology.com/2006/06/pretribpremillleft_behind.php |title=Pre-Trib?...Pre-Mill?....Left Behind |accessdate=2007-08-23 |date=[[2006]]-[[06-23]] |work=Reformation Theology}} Quoting from Samuel E. Waldron, ''The End Times Made Simple''.</ref> and a primary commitment of the Almighty to Israel within the crucible of the 70th Week of Daniel--although Dispensationalists recognize a redemptive witness to the Gentiles through the evangelistic witness of the 144,000<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0023.html |title=Who are the 144,000? |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Cooper |first=Charles |work=Sola Scriptura}}</ref> Jewish evangelists. Those "saints"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/rr-tribulation-saint.html |title=Tribulation Saint Wannabes |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Strandberg |first=Todd |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> evangelized through this preaching of the "gospel of the kingdom"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/AnInterpretationofMatthew24_25_12.html |title=An Interpretation of Matthew 24—25, Part XII |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> and who perish under the onslaught of the beast, constitute the tribulation saints<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.plymouthbrethren.com/cactrib.htm |title=Tribulation Saints (extract) |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Coates |first=C. A |work=PlymouthBrethren.com}}</ref> who "come out of great tribulation."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.grantjeffrey.com/article/why_some_reject.htm |title=Why Do Some Teach that the Church will Endure the Tribulation? |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Jeffrey |first=Grant R |work=Prophecy On Line |publisher=Grant R. Jeffrey Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
==Religious-political ramifications of Israel and the Church==<br />
<br />
Obvious collaboration between the "witnesses" is "eschatologically suggested" by those who espouse the two to be Israel and the Church--what form of cooperative witness seems crucial; especially with regards to the religious-political ramifications thereof. Naturally, evangelical support for the nation of Israel is viewed by a growing number of Israeli Jews, as well as diasporic Jews (especially Zionists), as beneficial to the survival of Israel and highly influential upon American foreign policy,<ref>{{cite news |first=David D |last=Kirkpatrick |title=For Evangelicals, Supporting Israel Is ‘God's Foreign Policy’ |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14israel.html?ex=1321160400&en=60ed9b6dede3816e&ei=5090 |work=The New York Times |date=[[2006]]-[[11-14]] |accessdate=2007-08-24}}</ref> whether the imagery of the Two Witnesses is reflected in this Evangelical-Jewish Zionist alliance or not. Furthermore, if the book of Revelation is to be viewed as a cosmic courtroom wherein the "Great City" is on trial, and the "Judge of all the earth" is pending a conviction by calling forth witnesses to "testify" against Babylon the Great (i.e., "the Holy City" vs. the "Great City" or New Jerusalem vs. Babylon the Great)<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000026.htm#26c |title=Chapter VIII: Tribulation & Judgment |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Shearer |first=S.R |work=The New Antipas Papers |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref> - then "Biblical collaboration" at the mouth of "two witnesses"<ref>Deuteronomy 19:15.</ref> prior to a conviction and ultimate sentence would be mandatory.<br />
<br />
David Brog, former chief counsel and later chief of staff to Senator Arlen Specter, recently highlighted the current support for Israel, among evangelical Christians in his book ''Stand with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State''.<ref>ISBN 978-1591859062.</ref> Brog's central thesis, both as a Jewish American and as the current Executive Director of the newly-formed Christians United for Israel, is unabashedly pro-Israel,<ref>{{cite news |first=Margot |last=Patterson |title=Evangelicals rally for Israel, warn of Iran threat |url=http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2006c/072806/072806h.php |work=National Catholic Reporter |date=[[2006]]-[[07-28]] |accessdate=2007-08-24}}</ref> and affirms that evangelical support for Israel should be encouraged by American Jews, as well as provide a forum for evangelical Christians to express their views on Capitol Hill. He is at the helm in galvanizing support for this newly-founded Evangelical-Jewish lobbying organization<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060814/new_christian_zionism |title=Birth Pangs of a New Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Blumenthal |first=Max |date=[[2006]]-[[08-08]] |work=TheNation.com}}</ref> on behalf of Israel. Brog, who is Jewish-not a Christian, has an executive board for Christians United for Israel consisting of prominent evangelicals: Michael Little,<ref name="cufi">{{cite web |url=http://www.cufi.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_executive_board |title=Executive Board |accessdate=2007-08-25 |year=2007 |publisher=Christians United for Israel}}</ref> [[John Hagee]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3323758,00.html |title=A blessing or a curse? American evangelists explained |accessdate=2007-08-25 |last=Benhorin |first=Yitzhak |date=[[2006]]-[[11-05]] |work=Ynetnews.com}}</ref> Gary Bauer,<ref name="cufi"/> and George Morrison<ref name="cufi"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fbci.org/aboutus/george.html |title=Meet Pastor George |accessdate=2007-08-25 |publisher=Faith Bible Chapel}}</ref> — all evangelicals, and all actively engaged in pro-Israel activities — activities which include "A Night to Honor Israel"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jhm.org/honorisrael.asp |title=A Night To Honor Israel |accessdate=2007-08-26 |work=John Hagee Ministries}}</ref> held throughout North America, as well as recent involvement<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5193092.stm |title=Evangelical Christians plead for Israel |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Greene |first=Richard Allen |date=[[2006]]-[[07-19]] |work=BBC News}}</ref> in the annual AIPAC gathering in Washington, D.C.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:tyCLPx6SrFUJ:www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w050523&s=baer052605+AIPAC+COURTS+EVANGELICALS&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5 |title=Security Measures |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Baer |first=Kenneth |date=[[2005]]-[[05-26]] |work=TNR Online |publisher=The New Republic}}</ref> ([[Jerry Falwell]] was also a member of the executive board of Christians United for Israel until his death.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cufi.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_press_releases#Falwell |title=Dr. Jerry Falwell- A Pioneer of Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Hagee |first=John |date=[[2007]]-[[05-16]] |work=Christians United for Israel}}</ref>) Such support for Israel is vehemently opposed by many on the left and right.<br />
<br />
Christian Zionism – a phenomenon commenced in Great Britain<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4959.htm |title=Christians and Zion: British stirrings |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Wagner |first=Donald |date=[[2003]]-[[10-09]] |work=The Daily Star |publisher=Information Clearing House}}</ref> in support of the Jewish State and championed by many American evangelical leaders<ref>{{cite web |url=http://mb-soft.com/believe/text/czionism.htm |title=Christian Zionism: Advanced Information |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Rausch |first=D A |year=1997 |month=May |work=Elwell Evangelical Dictionary |publisher=BELIEVE Religious Information Source}}</ref> throughout the past century, sees in Israel's rebirth the fulfillment of Bible prophecy<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewsonfirst.org/06bprint/fp013p.html |title=Mr. Hagee Draws Evangelicals By Arguing Jewish State Fulfills Biblical Prophecy |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Higgins |first=Andrew |date=[[2006]]-[[07-27]] |work=The Wall Street Journal |publisher=JewsOnFirst.org}}</ref> and the countdown to the Second Coming of Christ.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/07/10/MN17001.DTL |title=U.S. Christians find cause to aid Israel: Evangelicals financing immigrants, settlements |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Haas |first=Danielle |date=[[2002]]-[[07-10]] |work=San Francisco Chronicle |pages=A-1}}</ref> The proliferation of evangelical Christian organizations or Jewish organizations reaching out to one another with the common goal of supporting the survival of the nation of Israel in the U.S. and elsewhere includes: Bridges for Peace<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bridgesforpeace.com/h2n.php?fn=whoarewe.html |title=A Concise Summary of Who We Are |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2006 |publisher=Bridges for Peace}}</ref>; the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ifcj.org/site/PageServer?pagename=endorsements_ministries |title=Churches and Ministries that Support Israel |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2007 |publisher=International Fellowship of Christians and Jews}}</ref>; the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.icej.org/articles/about_us |title=About Us: Your Embassy in Jerusalem |accessdate=2007-09-09 |publisher=International Christian Embassy Jerusalem}}</ref>; Operation Exodus<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.operation-exodus.org/Operation-Exodus/about_ebenezer |title=About Ebenezer |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2007 |work=Operation Exodus |publisher=Ebenezer Emergency Fund International}}</ref>; Israel Awareness Day<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.easy-access.com/Ariel/Autumn96/Aut96-Page4.html |title=Faith Bible Chapel Adopts Ariel |accessdate=2007-12-16 |year=1996 |month=Autumn |work=Shalom Ariel |publisher=Ariel Development Fund |pages=4-5}}</ref> (and their writings<ref name="standing">{{cite book |last=Brog |first=David |title=Standing with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State |year=2006 |publisher=Frontline |isbn=9781591859062}}</ref> attest as well). Likewise, but with less verbosity are those mainline Christian organizations<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.loveandjustice.org/AlternateVoice/index.htm |title=Alternative Voice to Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |publisher=First Congregational Church}}</ref> and some evangelical leaders<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=2717 |title=The Evangelical-Jewish Alliance |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Wagner |first=Donald |date=[[2003]]-[[06-28]] |work=The Christian Century |pages=20-24}}</ref> (along with their writings)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.christianzionism.org/articlesN.asp |title=Challenging Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |year=2007}}</ref> who oppose the current alliance between Jews and evangelicals in support of Israel and her policies.<br />
<br />
Most evangelical churches and organizations in the USA in support of Israel are Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:jCEzcYlEhh4J:psreview.org/content/view/45/99/+Premillenarian+support+for+Israel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=12|title=Premillenarian}}</ref> in their ''Weltanschauung'' – with the majority being pretribulational;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:JPO9QHB5P2EJ:www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1746536/posts?page=14+Pre-Trib+and+Pro-Israel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4|title=pretribulational;}}</ref> hence, criticism on the part of many Jews that the main purpose of such support for Israel among evangelicals is self-interest and spurious at best,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewsonfirst.org/christian_zionists.php |title=Christian Zionists: Fundamentalist Christians' support of Israel could blunt Jewish opposition to religious right agenda |accessdate=2007-12-16 |work=Jews On First!}}</ref> and conversionary<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/christianzionism.html |title=Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Krusch |first=David |year=2007 |work=Jewish Virtual Library |publisher=American-Israeli Cooperative Exchange}}</ref> at worst. Furthermore, some evangelicals propose that the current Evangelical-Jewish alliance in support of Israel will not last and is contrary to Bible prophecy.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000140.htm |title=The Religious Right and Israel; A Relationship That Cannot Hold, Part III |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Shearer |first=S.R. |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
In addition to these suspicions from both Jews and evangelical Christians, there is religious-political angst expressed amongst co-religionists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000243.htm |title=The Neo-Conservatives |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Shearer |first=S. R |date=[[2006]]-[[12-12]] |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref> (Jewish and Christian) who view this Jewish-Christian solidarity on behalf of Israel as a mixture of Church and State and ''ipso facto'' contrary to the American experiment;<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=1174 |title=Renewing the American Experiment: A Post Election Reflection |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Korten |first=David |date=2004-11-07 |work=Yes! Online}}</ref> especially, as it pertains to [[neoconservatives|neocons]] both within<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.counterpunch.org/green02282004.html |title=Serving Two Flags: Neo-Cons, Israel and the Bush Administration |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Green |first=Stephen |date=2004-02-28 |work=Counterpunch}}</ref> and without<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.alternet.org/story/15481/ |title=All in the Neocon Family |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Lobe |first=Jim |date=2003-03-27 |work=AlterNet |publisher=Independent Media Institute}}</ref> the immediate US political administration, who some say are egging the alliance forward to suffice their own socio-political agenda and have little or no spiritual interest in the dynamic. They point out that ''theocons'' (in particular American Catholics),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=518 |title=RJN: Neocons v. Theocons: The Sequel |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Neuhaus |first=Richard John |date=2006-11-03 |work=First Things: On the Square}}</ref> who are allied with neocons (notwithstanding Jewish suspicions from time to time among the neocons)<ref>{{cite journal |last=Moore |first=Scott H. |year=1998 |month=Winter |title=The End of Convenient Stereotypes: How the ''First Things'' and Baxter Controversies Inaugurate Extraordinary Politics |journal=Pro Ecclesia |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=17–47 |url=http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/essays/Stereotypes.html |accessdate= 2007-12-18}}</ref> are drawing American evangelicals, who affirm they are under "Biblical mandate" to "bless Israel",<ref name="standing"/> into a religio-politico maelstrom<ref>{{cite press release |title=Cliff Potts Releases Theocon Nation: The Unvarnished, Politically Incorrect Truth About the Roots, Threat and Response to the Religious Right Political Movement |date=[[2006]]-[[05-26]] |url=http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/5/prweb390704.htm |accessdate=2007-12-18}}</ref> which, in the end, will politicize the American Church<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/prophetic_sequence_pt12.htm |title=Theo-Neo-Paleo Cons: …I saw a woman mounted on a Scarlet-colored Beast (Rev. 17:3 – ASV/the Message: Part XII – The Prophetic Sequence |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Krieger |first=Doug |publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> and compromise her "spiritual mission" and put America into a "crusader" mindset<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.damonlinker.com/ |title=Damon Linker |accessdate=2007-12-24 |last=Linker |first=Damon}}</ref> in defeating [[Islamism|radical Islamists]] and hedonist [[secularism]] in America, rather than fulfilling the ''Great Commission'' of Jesus in the saving of souls for the coming [[Premillennialism|premillenarian]] kingdom, not the Kingdom Now<ref>{{cite web| title=The Kingdom Now Movement| url=http://endtimepilgrim.org/70wks9.htm| author=Gavin Finley| publisher=Endtime Pilgrim.org}}</ref> Instead, Theocons are now about galvanizing Evangelicals and Catholics<ref>{{cite news |title=Evangelicals & Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium |url=http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9405/articles/mission.html |work=First Things |pages=15-22 |date=May 1994 |accessdate=2007-12-24}}</ref> in a great crusade against American hedonistic secularization and, interestingly enough, Israel is inadvertently caught up within that dynamic.<br />
<br />
==Exegetical considerations==<br />
<br />
In attempting to [[Biblical exegesis|exegete]] Revelation 11 commentators who hold to a Premillenarian eschatology generally fall into three areas of interpretation in the identification of the Two Witnesses: (1) The Two Witnesses are individuals either manifested in some form of reincarnation; or “in the spirit” of Biblical prophets who once appeared in Bible history; or simply as two individuals newly arrived on the earth; (2) the Two Witnesses are corporate in nature (human) standing for the Church only or for Israel only; or both Israel and the Church; or for both Jewish and Gentiles believers in Jesus; and (3) the Two Witnesses express Biblical concepts (i.e., the Old and New Testaments; the Law and the Prophets; Mercy and Grace).<br />
<br />
Their chronological order aside, the purpose and destiny of the Two Witnesses is to decry the reign of the Antichrist-Beast,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tribulation.com/beast.htm |title=The Dragon and Two Beasts of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-26 |date=[[2006-09-21]] |work=Tribulation.com |publisher=Atlantis Station}}</ref> and to attest against that “Great City”— (or Whore of Babylon, Babylon the Great. Likewise, in that they are called to “prophesy” and wear “sackcloth”<ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:3|141}}</ref> (a Biblical designation of a “call to repentance”) they assuredly are at the nexus of announcing the “gospel of the kingdom.”<ref>{{bibleverse||Matthew|24:14|141}}</ref><br />
<br />
John's Apocalypse (i.e., The Revelation of Jesus Christ) is considered by most Christian theologians to be the apostolic writings which incorporate more Hebrew (i.e., Old Testament) Scriptures into the text than any other book of the New Testament.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=1171 |title=Premillennialism in the Old Testament (Part 1) |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Fruchtenbaum |first=Arnold G. |date=[[2006-10-26]] |work=Believer's Web}}</ref> The images, symbolism, and allegorical language used throughout the Revelation are impossible to fathom or interpret without a fairly comprehensive knowledge of the original "Testament".<br />
<br />
===Israel and the Church as the “corporate witness"===<br />
<br />
Interconnected with Revelation 11, as some commentators have acknowledged<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.teachinghearts.org/dre17hrev11.html |title=Lesson 15: The Two Witnesses(Revelation 11)|accessdate=2007-08-26}}</ref>, is the imagery found in the latter part of {{bibleverse||Revelation|10:8-10|141}}:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Then the voice which I heard from heaven spoke to me again and said, ‘Go, take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel who stands on the sea and on the earth.’ So I went to the angel and said to him, ‘Give me the little book.’ And he said to me, ‘Take and eat it; and it will make your stomach bitter, but it will be as sweet as honey in your mouth.’ Then I took the little book out of the angel's hand and ate it, and it was as sweet as honey in my mouth. But when I had eaten it, my stomach became bitter. And he said to me, ‘You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
John becomes a symbol of prophetic witness to the world—becoming wholly identified with the prophetic message; and, subsequently, that prophetic witness must be declared: “You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings.” Then John is given a “reed like a measuring rod” and told to “Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there. But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles . . . and they (the Gentiles) will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.”<ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:2|141}}</ref><br />
<br />
The “court” referenced here appears to be an allusion to the “Court of the Gentiles”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bible-history.com/jewishtemple/JEWISH_TEMPLEThe_Court_of_the_Gentiles.htm |title=The Court of the Gentiles |accessdate=2007-08-26}}</ref> which during the sacerdotal rites in ancient Jerusalem provided “uncircumcised gentiles” who were interested in the Jewish religion to venture into the temple complex but not into the area of the sacrificial altar; hence, they were not full participants and remained on the peripheral of full commitment; unless, of course, they were willing to be circumcised. Numerous Christian commentaries perceive the issue of circumcision as a matter of the heart and the cutting away of the “flesh” an experiential expression of Christian commitment to holiness and sanctification--Paul, the Apostle, repeatedly enunciates deeper understanding of "spiritual circumcision"<ref>{{bibleverse||Romans|2:28-29|141}}; {{bibleverse||Philippians|3:8|141}}; {{bibleverse||Colossians|2:11|141}}.</ref><br />
<br />
Those willing to “pay the price” – having their flesh cut off (i.e., their “hearts dealt with”) – are those “measured at the altar of sacrifice.”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://pastorbryan.blogspot.com/2006/11/inner-life.html |title=The Inner Life |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Galloway |first=Bryan |date=[[2006-11-21]] |work=Praying for Revival!}}</ref> Hence, immediately following this imagery, the “holy city”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ucg.org/booklets/RV/twowomen.htm |title=The Two Women of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-26 |year=2007 |work=The Book of Revelation Unveiled |publisher= United Church of God}}</ref> is mentioned for the first time in the Revelation. Some commentators have recognized this connection and affirm that the “holy city” and those measured at the altar are one in the same.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://users.bigpond.net.au/bkolberg/chapters/chapter20.html |title=Revelation 11 and the Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Kolberg |first=Bruno |work=Daniel's Fourth Kingdom}}</ref> Ultimately, it is that “holy city” which is juxtaposed to the “great city” in other portions of the Revelation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wcg.org/lit/prophecy/babylon.htm |title=Who Is "Babylon"? |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Kroll |first=Paul |publisher=Worldwide Church of God}}</ref> Likewise, the first mentioning of the “great city” occurs in Revelation 11, verse 8. The ultimate expression of the "divine masterpiece" (i.e., the work of God, "the Woman, the Lamb's Bride" is viewed as the New Jerusalem in {{bibleverse||Revelation|21:10-21|141}}, along with two proper names describing her gates and foundations: "twelve gates . . . with names written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel . . . twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (again, Israel and the Church). Once the holy city is announced as the receptacle of gentile antagonism (tread the holy city underfoot), there is the immediate prophetic declaration:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth. <ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:3}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Thus, John's representation of the prophet is now “transferred” to the prophetic ministry of the Two Witnesses. The disclosure that these Two Witnesses (the Greek word for witness is ''martus'' (μαρτυς), which is also translated as "martyr"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRGRK31.htm#S3144 |title=King James Bible Strong's Greek Dictionary |accessdate=2007-12-24}}</ref>) foretells their ultimate destiny. Furthermore, they are immediately identified as: "These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth" (Revelation 11:4).<br />
<br />
Those embracing Israel and the Church as the Two Witnesses identify the number "two"<ref>{{cite book |last=Bullinger |first=E. W. |title=Number in Scripture: Its Supernatural Design and Spiritual Significance |origyear=1921 |url=http://philologos.org/__eb-nis/two.htm |accessdate=2007-12-24 |edition=4th ed. rev. |year=2001 |publisher=Eyre & Spottiswoode (Bible Warehouse) |location=London}}</ref> connoting the “witness of Israel”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://christianactionforisrael.org/witness/witness.html |title=Witness to the Nations |accessdate=2007-12-25 |publisher=Christian Action for Israel}}</ref> to the gentile nations during the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks{{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}; as well as the fact that the "olive tree"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.levitt.com/essays/olivetree.html |title=What is the Olive Tree? |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=McCall |first=Thomas S. |year=2001 |month=March |work=Levitt Letter |publisher=Zola Levitt Ministries}}</ref> in the Scripture signifies Israel. The "witness of the Church" is signified by the "two lampstands"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.restoringthevision.com/Ch11RtheV.htm |title=Restoring the Vision of the End Times Church |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Kuenzi |first=Vernon L. |year=2001}}</ref> whose identity was disclosed by the “seven golden lampstands” (i.e., candlesticks) revealed in Revelation 2-3 as the “churches.”<br />
<br />
Furthermore, this imagery clearly harkens back to Zechariah 4 and the “two sons of oil” or “two olive trees” who astride the “golden lamp stand” seen by [[Zechariah]] the prophet.<ref>Zechariah 4:2-4, 11-14.</ref> Zerubbabel, the governor, and Joshua the High Priest (the kingship and the priesthood) are seen by the Almighty wholly empowered for the rebuilding of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem or ''Third Temple'' after its destruction under [[Nebuchadrezzar II|King Nebuchadnezzar II]]: “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord.”<ref>Zechariah 4:6.</ref> <br />
<br />
Extending Zechariah's vision to the Revelation, John sees in the midst of the seven golden lamp stands, “one like unto the Son of Man.” Therefore, as Zechariah's vision saw the “kingship and the priesthood” on either side of the “universal lamp stand” – even so, that prophetic illumination is seen in the Revelation as the Son of Man, the “spirit of prophecy” disseminating light and life to the churches as the present “work of God” – as the work of the Almighty was expressed in Zechariah 4 – the work of God is expressed in Revelation 1 and confirmed by the bringing together in testimony and witness the ministry of the prophet; thus, is Christ's work as “prophet, priest, and king”<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:LKLx-OjNTEkJ:www.modernreformation.org/kr95triple.htm+Zechariah+4+-+Christ+is+Prophet,+Priest,+and+King&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2|title=king"}}</ref> fully declared through the Two Witnesses.<br />
<br />
Again, those who hold to the “corporate nature” of these Two Witnesses point out that the further disclosures of what they “do” over against who they “are” does not negate their identities but affirms that their witness is to the earth (i.e., Israel – turning the waters into blood and striking “the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire”) and to the heavens (i.e., the Church – “have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy”). Here, the Apostle Paul's writings of the Church's “heavenly stature” confirms such a witness; whereas Israel's call to be a “light to the gentiles” confirms their original commission.<ref>Ephesians 6:10-13.</ref><br />
<br />
Those<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/articles/individualism_and_the_american_church.htm |title=Individualism and the American Church ... How American Culture Distorts our Perception of the Church |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=Shearer |first=Douglas R. |date=1993-06-29 |work=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> adhering to a corporate expression of the Two Witnesses point out that “Reformational Christianity”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://thebigpicture.homestead.com/files/CHRISTIANITYANDCULTURE.html |title=Christianity and Culture: The Case for Reformational Cultural Activism |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=Strauss |first=Gideon |date=1992-10-02}}</ref> has distorted our perception (especially in America) of one's identity. By this is meant that the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] and [[Protestant Reformation|Reformation]] laid stress upon one's “individualism” (i.e., salvation is a “personal encounter with Christ” and not a salvivic experience through one's identity with the Church—“saved in the Church”). It is this identification with the individual juxtaposed to one's personhood reflected in the collective group that misses the spiritual dimension of Revelation 11 (i.e., “in Christ” or “in Adam” connotes corporate identification).<ref>1 Corinthians 15:22.</ref><br />
<br />
Once they “finish their testimony” the unveiling, and first mention in the Revelation of the ''The Beast'' who ascends out of the ''bottomless pit'', is made. They pay the uttermost price for their testimony: “the beast . . . will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them” (Rev. 11:7). The word used for ''war'' in the Greek connotes a major conflagration, not a skirmish or interpersonal struggle; thereby drawing attention to the corporate nature of the conflict between the beast and the Two Witnesses; for the beast would not make ''war'' against two individuals (Greek: ''polemos'' - see Strong's Greek 4171).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRGRK41.htm|title=4171).}}</ref><br />
<br />
Then their “body” (the Greek singular is used: ''ptoma''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/STRGRK44.htm#S4430|title=''ptoma''}}</ref> -meaning ''corpes'') lies exposed in the “street of the great city” which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” (vs. 8). To illustrate that this city is the “great city” juxtaposed to the “holy city” – and not Jerusalem – the ''Spirit Filled Life Bible'' footnote affirms these witnesses face off with the worldly system, the great city, headed up by the beast: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The great city is not literally the physical city of Jerusalem, but spiritually the world in rebellion against God. Sodom symbolizes immorality, and Egypt symbolizes the political oppression of the people of God in this world where our Lord was crucified. (''The Spirit Filled Life Bible'', Thomas Nelson Bibles,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.seekgod.ca/hayford.htm|title=Bibles,}}</ref> P. 1831)<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
This argument is reinforced by Rev. 11:8 pointedly stating that the great city is “spiritually” or “allegorically” called Sodom and Egypt—and Jerusalem is never mentioned in the text; however, many commentators do not see a problem in this—because the phrase “where also our Lord was crucified” must mean Jerusalem; for Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem. Others counter—Jesus was crucified “outside the camp”<ref>Hebrews 13:13.</ref>– “outside the gate”<ref>Hebrews 13:12.</ref> (not in Jerusalem proper) by the Romans (gentiles) and this Revelation passage appears to back this notion of the “great city” doing the work of crucifixion.<br />
<br />
Posttribulationists,<ref>{{Citation |last=Willems |first=Arthur G. |title =Book Review: The Church and the Tribulation |newspaper=Direction |pages=34–35 |date=April 1976 |url=http://www.directionjournal.org/article/?202}}</ref> who see this dual witness of Israel and the Church (in counterdistinction to premillenarian-pretribulationists who accuse these posttribulationists of “blurring” the traditional dispensational distinctions of Israel and the Church),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ldolphin.org/progdispen.html |title=A Proper Biblical D.I.E.T. |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=McCall |first=Tom |coauthors=Zola Levitt |year=2000 |month=February |work=Levitt Letter}}</ref> likewise adhere to the 3 ½ days of “their body” exposed to the “open persecution” ("their body lies in the street of the great city"; i.e., the 42 months aforementioned in Revelation 11:2) as the final three-and-one-half years of Prophecy of Seventy Weeks of Daniel's Prophecy and that the days mentioned here are years (i.e., the 70th Week represents seven years and 3 ½ days represents 1,260 days, 42 months, 3 ½ years, or time, times, and half a time)(See: 2300 Days or Day-year principle). <br />
<br />
Therefore, it is at the very close of the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy that the Two Witnesses are resurrected—there is no secret rapture (i.e., they are seen by all the inhabitants of the earth; Rev. 11:11)—a loud voice is heard from heaven calling all the “righteous dead” in the resurrection and those that are “alive and survive” the great tribulation are, as Paul proclaims: “The dead in Christ shall rise first, then we which are alive and ''remain'' (Grk. ''perileipo'' meaning ''survive'' - Strong's Greek: 4035).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/STRGRK40.htm|title=4035).}}</ref> shall be caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air” (I Thessalonians 4:16-17).<br />
<br />
Once again, it must be pointed out that Historicists see this 1,260-day period as 1,260 years and believe it is the time of the Papacy's<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.heraldmag.org/literature/proph_38.htm |title=The Man of Sin |accessdate=2007-12-31}}</ref> “rule and reign” as the antichrist system between A.D. 538 and 1798 (i.e., from the time the Roman Church was recognized as the “civil authority” until the time of [[Napoleon]]'s imprisoning of Pope Pius VI and his death in 1798).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Ott |first=Michael T. |year=1911 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref><br />
<br />
The subsequent passages in Revelation 11:13-19 are interpreted by Post-tribulationists as confirmation that the pouring out of the “wrath of God” (i.e., after the resurrection and rapture) is seen "in the same hour" (Revelation 11:13). Immediately, Messiah's descending from the heavens to establish His earthly kingdom and the famous sounds of Handel's Messiah, and of John's prophetic testimony, are heard:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The kingdoms of this world have now become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Messiah (Christ), and he shall reign forever and ever! (Rev. 11:15)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Revelation declares: “The Testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”<ref>Revelation 19:10.</ref> – therefore, as their deliverer testified on earth for 3 ½ years,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.carm.org/questions/Jesus_age.htm |title=How old was Jesus when He was crucified? |accessdate=2007-12-31 |year=2007 |work=Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry}}</ref> was crucified, arose from the dead, ascended to heaven – even so, this is the destiny of all those who will follow the Messiah--this is the "testimony of Jesus".<ref>Revelation 1:2.</ref> Furthermore, the extremity of believers who profess to have the "Testimony of Jesus" may be called to give the ultimate sacrifice in bearing witness to the One Who gave His all: "Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their '''witness''' to Jesus and for the word of God" (Rev. 20:4).<br />
<br />
===Church or concepts===<br />
<br />
Evangelical [[postmillennialism]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/pdf/Ice-WhatisPostmillennial.pdf |title=What Is Postmillenialism? Tom's Perspectives |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |format=PDF}}</ref> as well as St. Augustine's amillennialism,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://persweb.wabash.edu/facstaff/royaltyr/augustine.htm |title=Augustine and the Millennium |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Hutchinson |first=John M.}}</ref> accord future roles for the Two Witnesses in their commentaries; however, those roles are wholly symbolic of the Church's singular witness to the world. As Amillenarian Tony Warren declares:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
These two witnesses of Revelation eleven are a ‘symbol’ of God's faithful servants, the true eternal indivisible Church.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://members.aol.com/twarren17/rev11.html |title=A verse by verse exposition of Revelation Chapter 11 |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Warren |first=Tony |date=2002-10-14 |work=The Mountain Retreat}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Hence, the Church is the “Israel of God”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://members.aol.com/twarren13/israel2.html |title=The True Israel of God |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Shelton |first=L. R. |work=The Mountain Retreat}}</ref> – and the concluding witness of the Church, as originally propounded by Augustine,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/millenni.htm |title=Eschatology, End Times, and Millennialism: Competing Theories |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Robinson |first=B. A. |date=2006-08-18 |work=ReligiousTolerance.org |publisher=Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance}} </ref> will endure to the end of the age as a demonstration of “the age-long struggle of evil against Christ's rule.” Israel and the Church constitute one people of God—there is no literal seven-year tribulation on earth. Evangelical postmillennialism also sees Israel and the Church as the one people of God; however, the Millennium will be a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ, realized through the church's ministry of the kingdom of God.<br />
<br />
They who adhere to the singular witness of the Church until the [[Second Coming]] of Christ, affirm the Church's unique testimony until the [[Eschatology|eschaton]]. <br />
<br />
The 1599 Geneva Study Bible<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GenevaStudyBible/gen.cgi?book=re&chapter=011)|title=Bible}}</ref> asserts the two witnesses as the exclusive purvue of the church:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
1) The authority of the intended revelation being declared, together with the necessity of that calling which was particularly imposed on John after which follows the history of the estate of Christ his Church, both conflicting or warring, and overcoming in Christ. For the true Church of Christ is said to fight against that which is falsely so called, over which Antichrist rules, Christ Jesus overthrowing Antichrist by the spirit of his mouth: and Christ is said to overcome most gloriously until he shall slay Antichrist by the appearance of his coming, as the apostle teaches in (2 Thessalonians 2:8). So this history has two parts: One of the state of the Church conflicting with temptations until Chapter 16. The other of the state of the same church obtaining victory, thence to Chapter 20. The first part has two sections most conveniently distributed into their times, of which the first contains a history of the Christian Church for 1260 years, what time the gospel of Christ was as it were taken up from among men into heaven: the second contains a history of the same Church to the victory perfected. These two sections are briefly, though distinctly propounded in this chapter, but both of them are discoursed after in due order.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
This comment from the Geneva Study Bible is made on Revelation 11:4:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth . . .That is, the ordinary and perpetual instruments of spiritual grace, peace and light in my Church, which God by his only power preserved in this Temple. See (Zechariah 4:3).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
A somewhat collective expression of the Church as the singular witness is given in [[Matthew Henry]]'s Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/MatthewHenryComplete/mhc-com.cgi?book=re&chapter=011|title=Bible;}}</ref> Revelation 11:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
It is a sufficient number; for in the mouth of two witnesses every cause shall be established. Christ sent out his disciples two by two, to preach the gospel. Some think these two witnesses are Enoch and Elias, who are to return to the earth for a time: others, the church of the believing Jews and that of the Gentiles: it should rather seem that they are God's eminent faithful ministers, who shall not only continue to profess the Christian religion, but to preach it, in the worst of times. II. The time of their prophesying, or bearing their testimony for Christ. A thousand two hundred and threescore days; that is (as many think), to the period of the reign of antichrist; and, if the beginning of that interval could be ascertained, this number of prophetic days, taking a day for a year, would give us a prospect when the end shall be. III.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
[[John Wesley]] in his commentary on Revelation 11<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/WesleysExplanatoryNotes/wes.cgi?book=re&chapter=011|title=Revelation 11}}</ref> suggests a more "spiritual" application of their identity - almost ambiguous in nature:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
11:3 And I - Christ - will give to my two witnesses - These seem to be two prophets; two select, eminent instruments. Some have supposed (though without foundation) that they are Moses and Elijah, whom they resemble in several respects. To prophesy twelve hundred and sixty days - Common days, that is, an hundred and eighty weeks. So long will they prophesy, (even while that last and sharp treading of the holy city continues,) both by word and deed, witnessing that Jesus is the Son of God, the heir of all things, and exhorting all men to repent, and fear, and glorify God. Clothed in sackcloth - The habit of the deepest mourners, out of sorrow and concern for the people. 11:4 These are the two olive trees - That is, as Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two olive trees spoken of by Zechariah, Zechariah 3:9, 4:10, were then the two chosen instruments in God's hand, even so shall these. be in their season. Being themselves full of the unction of the Holy One, they shall continually transmit the same to others also. And the two candlesticks - Burning and shining lights. Standing before the Lord of the earth - Always waiting on God, without the help of man, and asserting his right over the earth and all things therein.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
John Gill's ''Exposition of the Bible''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/gil.cgi?book=re&chapter=011&verse=003&next=004&prev=002|title=Bible}}</ref> presents a classical Protestant Historicist interpretation of the two witnesses as the true Church in counter distinction to the ''antichrist'' system of Roman Catholicism:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Though they ought not to be considered exclusive of other ministers and churches, who also have bore, and still do bear a witness for Christ, and against the idolatries of the church of Rome: no two individual persons can be meant, since these witnesses were to prophesy 1260 days, that is, so many years, but a succession of ministers and churches.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Ross Taylor's "Verse by Verse Commentary on Revelation"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.apocalipsis.org/rev-11.htm|title=Revelation"}}</ref> clearly defines the Church as the "two olive trees and the two lampstands" . . .<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The two witnesses represent the witnessing church rather than two individuals: 1. The church received power to witness at Pentecost, see verse 3 'I will give power to my two witnesses and they will prophecy...' cf. Acts 1:8 and 2:18. 2. Two is the number to establish a witness, testimony (Deu 17:6, John 8:17, 2 Cor 13:1), for example our Lord sent his disciple out in twos, Mark 6:7. 3. They are described as 'the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth' 11:4. We have already seen that the church is symbolised by lampstands in 1:20. The olive trees represent the power of the Holy Spirit with which the witnesses had received (Acts 1:5, 1:8, 2:17). 4. They prophecy for the same period (1,260 days) as the worshippers, temple of God and holy city is trampled on by the Gentiles (42 months). These three designations are all indicative of the church. 5. They rise from the dead and are raptured as is the church (11:11-12). 6. 11:7 indicates that '...the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them' i.e. the two witnesses this parallels the warning in 13:7 that the beast 'was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them' see also the warning in 13:10. If the two events are indeed parallel then the two witnesses are the saints.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Furthermore, the elimination of all or part of the 70th Week of Daniel (yet future) is the hallmark of Historicist eschatology—there is no personal Antichrist, peace treaty to be signed with Israel, a future rebuilt Jewish temple, or future 70th week.{{Fact|date=July 2008}}<br />
<br />
===An Amillennial Exposition of Revelation 11:1-13===<br />
<br />
An Amillennial exposition of Revelation 11:1-13 is available at this link.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/files/show_article.php?id=153 |title=Nollie Malabuyo, "The Two Faithful Witnesses" |date=[[2005]]-[[03-22]] |work=TwoAgesPilgrims.com}}</ref> You can also read an exegesis of the passage in [http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/files/show_article.php?id=157/ "Will Moses and Elijah Come Back? The Two Witnesses of Revelation 11:1-13"]<br />
<br />
===Individuals===<br />
<br />
The identity and worldwide notoriety of the Two Witnesses as singular individuals is held by numerous Biblical literalists – a few of their quotations will confirm their commentary . . .<br />
<br />
Dr. Thomas L. Constable of Dallas Theological Seminary on his studies of Revelation (''Notes on Revelation'', 2007 Edition) provides a dispensationalist interpretation of the two witnesses as two "new individuals" to arrive on the prophetic scene yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Even though believing Jews will suffer persecution at this time, God will still get His message out. Two witnesses will be especially significant at this time. Valid testimony required two witnesses under the Old Covenant (Deut. 19:15), and both Jesus and the early church sent out emissaries in pairs (Mark 6:7; Luke 10:2; Acts 13:2; 15:39-40). Revelation 11:3 Who is speaking in this verse? The speaker seems to be the angel who spoke in verses 1-2, who here speaks for God (cf. v. 8). God did not reveal the identity of the two witnesses. Many commentators believe they will be Moses and Elijah since these men were prophets and performed the kinds of miracles these witnesses will perform (v. 6). Others believe they will be Enoch and Elijah since God took these men to heaven without dying. Another reason some believe one of these witnesses will be Elijah is Malachi 4:5, which predicts that Elijah will return before Messiah. Other less literal interpreters think the two witnesses may represent not two individuals but the faithful witness of the church throughout its persecutions. I agree with those who believe that they will be individuals living at this time rather than former prophets brought back to earth for this ministry (cf. Matt. 11:14).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://soniclight.com/constable/notes/pdf/revelation.pdf |title=Notes on<br />
Revelation: 2007 Edition |accessdate=2007-08-28 |last=Constable |first=Thomas L. |year=2007 |format=PDF |publisher=Sonic Light |pages=98 }}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
J. Dwight Pentecost's ''Things to Come'' (also of dispensationalist - Dallas Theological Seminary) concludes:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
It would seem best to conclude that the identity of these men is uncertain. They, in all probability, are not men who lived before and have been restored, but are two men raised up as a special witness, to whom sign-working power is given. their ministry is one of judgment, as their sackcloth clothing indicates.<ref>{{cite book |last=Pentecost |first=J. Dwight |title=Things to Come |year=1962 |publisher=Dunham Publishing Company |location=Findlay, Ohio |page=308}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Paul D. Feinberg<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.foutz.net/archives/people/paul_d_feinberg_phd_in_memorium_february_21_2004.shtml|title=Paul D. Feinberg)}}</ref> in ''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.amazon.com/Three-Views-Rapture-Pre-Post-Tribulation/dp/0310212952|title=''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation''}}</ref> defends the Pre-Tribulational Rapture position and interprets the two witnesses as follows:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
"The two witnesses appear to be individuals rather than representatives of all living and dead saints. The witnesses perform miracles; they testify. These actions are usually done by individuals, not groups. Moreover, both witnesses are killed by the Beast. If they are symbolic of all saints, then it seems as if all saints will be martyred before the Rapture. Further, it also appears that all saints will have men gaze at their dead bodies and desecrate them." (''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation'', Stanley N. Gundry, Gleason L. Archer Jr., Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1996, p. 148)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Those adhering to the "individual theory" of the two witnesses point out that these are truly awesome figures. They are similar to [[Moses]] and [[Aaron]] or [[Elijah]] and [[Elisha]] - both sets wrought indisputable havoc upon their audiences (Egypt and [[Apostasy|Apostate]] Israel) and "nothing could harm them." Therefore, could not individuals be raised up in the "end of days" and do such world-wide miracles? Could they not prevail as Moses and Elijah did before the masses? Furthermore, "their dead body" (singular) does not signify any "corporate nature" of their identity--to the contrary, it simply means the visibility of a dead body in the street of Jerusalem for 3 1/2 days (not years). Their resurrection is peculiar to them only--and does not connote the ''Resurrection of the just'' nor the rapture, for the rapture of the Church (according to pretribulationists) takes place at the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
<br />
The "great city" mentioned in Revelation 11 is not the great city found elsewhere in the Revelation<ref>{{cite web |url=http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Bible.show/sVerseID/30881/eVerseID/30881 |title=Forerunner Commentary |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=Ritenbaugh |first=John W. |year=2008 |work=BibleTools |publisher=Church of the Great God}}</ref>; and the "holy city" trampled under foot is physical Jerusalem,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn32/jerusalem.htm |title=Jerusalem: Focus of Biblical Prophecy |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=McNeely |first=Darris |year=2001 |month=January/February |work=The Good News |publisher=United Church of God}}</ref> not the two witnesses. Likewise, the "temple" which is measured is the physical rebuilt temple<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/featured/price/7rp.html |title=An Overview of the Future Temples |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=Price |first=Randall |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> in Jerusalem, not the two witnesses.<br />
<br />
The late Dr. John Walvoord, president of Dallas Theological Seminary, in his ''Every Prophecy of the Bible''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/walvoord.html|title=''Every Prophecy of the Bible''}}</ref> repeats the classical dispensational, pre-tribulational, literalist interpretation of the two witnesses . . . excerpts from his text:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In the Great Tribulation the temple has already been desecrated, sacrifices stopped, and the worship of the world ruler installed instead (Dan. 9:27; 12:11-12; Matt. 24:15; 2 Thes. 2:4; Rev. 13:14-15). Measuring the temple will indicate the apostasy of the nation of Israel and their need for revival and restoration. The Holy City, Jerusalem, according to the Scripture, will be trampled underfoot of Gentiles for the final forty-two months preceding the Second Coming. This has actually been true ever since 600 B.C. because from then to the time of the Great Tribulation, Israel never was in full possession of their holy places except by Gentile tolerance and permission. This is still true today as Israel could not retain its independence without the help of the United States. The forty-two months, however, refer to the Great Tribulation as a time when the holy place in the temple will be desecrated especially, and the Great Tribulation will run its course, climaxing in the second coming of Christ (13:5). Though there have been brief periods in the history of Israel when Israel temporarily retained control of the holy place, it will never be permanently theirs until the second coming of Christ. John was then introduced to those who were called 'two witnesses' who will be prophets in the end time. Their prophecy will cover 1,260 days, or forty-two months, the same length of time that the world ruler will possess the temple and turn it into a religious center for the worship of himself . . . the reference to the two witnesses as being symbolized by the two olive trees and the two lampstands probably has reference to Zechariah 4 where the lampstand and two trees are discussed. The meaning of this to Zerubbabel, who was one of the important leaders in Israel in Zechariah's time, was that their witness was empowered by the oil from the olive tree, symbolic of being empowered by the Holy Spirit (Zech. 4:1-14). In view of the fact that the Bible does not indicate who they are, it is probably safe to recognize them as two witnesses who will appear in the end time who are not related to any previous historical character.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Some claim that the two are "Jewish evangelists" who "evangelize Israel" while the 144000 of Revelation 7 "evangelize the rest of the world" during the 70th Week of Daniel.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Who are they? We're not told, so we can't be certain, yet we know that . . . - ''Witness'' in Greek is ''martus'' (''martyr''). In Rev. 12:11 OT Israeli allusions are used, not NT Church figures like Peter or Paul. These two evangelize Israel; while the 144,000 evangelize the rest of the world! They possibly represent the OT Law and Prophets (Matt 22:36-40). Possibly Elijah (Representing the Prophets). Possibly Moses (Representing the Law).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.soulcare.org/Bible%20Studies/Revelation/Revelation11_Witnesses.htm |title=Revelation 11 Consequences of Christ: The Two Witnesses Mercy-Grace |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Galloway |first=Sid |date=2001-03-18 |work=The Bible: One Bite at a Time}}</ref></blockquote><br />
<br />
The [[Eastern Orthodox Church]] teaches that the Two Witnesses will be [[Enoch]] and Elias (the two individuals who entered bodily into heaven), who will be sent back to earth to preach during the Great Tribulation, and they will be the last [[martyr]]s before the [[Second Coming]]. <br />
<br />
Biblical literalists have incorporated the developments in electronic communications systems with the interpretations of the scripture: "And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves" (Revelation 11:9). During the close of the nineteenth century, Ethelbert William Bullinger indicated electronics inventiveness would facilitate the literal fulfillment of this prophecy through the following statement and its footnote:<ref>Bullinger, E. W. (1984). ''Commentary on Revelation'' [[p. 365]]. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications. ISBN 0-8254-2289-2. According to the [[printers key]], the second printing of this work was in 1889.</ref><br />
<br />
:The older commentators might have felt a difficulty in understanding how the whole earth could rejoice at an event happening at Jerusalem. But in these days of electric inventions, telephones, and wireless telegraphy, we all know how the next day the whole world sympathises and rejoices together.<br />
::Witness the death of Queen Victoria; the murder of President M’Kinley; or the American Yacht Race – all the stages of the latter were known the world over within a few minutes of the passing events.<br />
<br />
During the 1930s, when [[television]] became commercially available, Knoch stated that invention merely needed to be developed further for the literal fulfillment of the above scripture.<ref>Knoch, A. E. (1935). ''The Unveiling of Jesus Christ'' [p. 319]. Saugus, CA: Concordant Publishing Concern.</ref> Two years after the launch of [[Sputnik]], Bloomfield said the events of Revelation 11:9 would be covered by “some kind of television.”<ref> Bloomfield, A. E. (2002). ''The Key to Understanding Revelation'' [p.200]. Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers. ISBN 0-7642-2593-6. Originally published 1959</ref> In 1962, the first satellite to relay a television signal from Europe to North America was Telstar. [[Hal Lindsey]] referred to that specific communication system in his explanation.<ref>Lindsey, H. (1977). ''There’s A New World Coming'' [p. 151]. New York, NY: Bantam Books, Incorporated. ISBN 0-553-10832-8. Originally published by Vision House Publishers in 1973.</ref> By 1999, John F. Walvoord,<ref>Walvoord, J. F. (1999). ''Every Prophecy of the Bible'' [p. 574]. Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing. ISBN 1-56476-758-2. Formerly titled ''The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook'' (1990).</ref> Tim LaHaye,<ref>LaHaye, T. F. (1999). ''Revelation Unveiled'' [p. 188]. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. ISBN 0-310-23005-5.</ref> and Grant Jeffrey,<ref>Jeffrey, G. R. (1999). ''The Signature of God The Handwriting of God'' [p. 194]. New York, NY: Inspirational Press. ISBN 0-88486-255-0.</ref> leading proponents of the literalist view and authors of best sellers, had explained Revelation 11:9 in terms of literal fulfillments through some form of worldwide satellite television system.<br />
<br />
Finally, perhaps they are archangels.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/snotes/note1204.html |title=The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Loughran |first=David B |year=1999 |work=Sermon Notes |publisher=Stewarton Bible School}}</ref><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
<br />
*[[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
*[[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
*[[Antichrist]]<br />
*[[Apocalypse]]<br />
*[[Armageddon]]<br />
*[[Book of Daniel]]<br />
*[[Book of Revelation]]<br />
*[[Eschatology]]<br />
*[[End times]]<br />
*[[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
*[[Last Judgment]]<br />
*[[Millenarianism]]<br />
*[[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
*[[Preterism]]<br />
*[[Postmillennialism]]<br />
*[[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
*[[Third Temple]]<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
*Historicism(Christian eschatology) - Historicism is an eschatological system of prophetic interpretation derived from the Protestant Reformation and holds that the prophecies of the Bible have taken place throughout history (many have been fulfilled) - some still will be fulfilled.<br />
*Futurism (Christian eschatology) - Biblical Futurism asserts that most of the relevant prophetic themes of Christian and Hebrew Scripture are yet future - the "end times" prophecies are mainly found outside the immediate time frame but could unravel any time - most hold to a literal, physical, apocalyptic and global view of Bible prophecies.<br />
*[[Preterism]] - A variant of Christian eschatology which holds that some or all of the biblical prophecies concerning the Last Days (or End Times) refer to events which actually happened in the first century after Christ's birth.<br />
*Partial Preterism - A form of Christian eschatology that holds much in common with but is distinct from Full preterism (or 'consistent' or 'hyper' preterism) in that it places the events of most of the Book of Revelation as occurring during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD (and/or the Fall of Rome several centuries later) yet still affirms an orthodox future bodily return of Christ to earth at an unknown day and hour.<br />
*Idealism (Christian eschatology) - Idealism (also called the 'Spiritual view') in Christian eschatology is an interpretation of the Book of Revelation that sees all of the imagery of the book as non-literal symbols which are perpetually and cyclically fulfilled in a spiritual sense during the conflict between the Kingdom of God and the forces of Satan throughout the time from the first advent to the Second Coming of Christ.<br />
*Millennialism - Millennialism (or chiliasm), from millennium, which literally means "thousand years", is primarily a belief expressed in some Christian denominations, and literature, that there will be a Golden Age or Paradise on Earth where "Christ will reign" prior to the final judgment and future eternal state, primarily derived from the book of Revelation 20:1-6. Millennialism as such is a specific form of Millenarianism.<br />
*[[Postmillennialism]] - In Christian eschatology, postmillennialism is an interpretation of chapter 20 of the Book of Revelation which sees Christ's second coming as occurring after or post- the thousand year "millennium".<br />
*[[Premillennialism]] - Christian eschatology which holds the belief that Christ will literally reign on the earth for 1,000 years at his second coming. The doctrine is called premillennialism because it views the current age as prior to Christ's kingdom. It is distinct from other forms of eschatology such as amillennialism, postmillennialism, and preterism which view the kingdom as figurative and non-temporal, or as currently occurring in history before Christ's coming. Premillennialism is largely based upon a literal interpretation of Revelation 20:1-6 in the New Testament which describes Christ's coming to the earth and subsequent reign at the end of an apocalyptic period of tribulation. It views this future age as a time of fulfillment for the prophetic hope of God's people as given in the Old Testament.<br />
*Amillennialism -Amillennialism (from the Latin prefix meaning "no", ''mille'', meaning "thousand", and ''annum'' meaning "year") is a view in Christian eschatology named for its denial of a future, thousand-year, physical reign of Jesus Christ on the earth, as espoused in the premillennial and some postmillennial views of the Book of Revelation, chapter 20.<br />
*[[Tribulation|The Tribulation]] - The Tribulation (or "Great Tribulation") is an event referred to in the New Testament of the Bible at Matthew 24:21 ("For then shall be great tribulation..." - King James Version) and other passages. In the futurist view of Christian eschatology, the Tribulation is a relatively short period of time where believers will experience worldwide persecution and be purified and strengthened by it.<br />
*[[Rapture]] - The rapture (''harpazo'' in Greek in 1 Thessalonians 4:17) is the common description of the event in Christian eschatology in which Christians will be "taken" or "caught up" from Earth to Heaven to be with Jesus Christ.<br />
*Post Tribulation Rapture - This doctrine holds that there is a Resurrection-Rapture of living believers in Jesus Christ at the end of the age (or the "End times"). Posttribulationists believe that Christians will not be taken up into Heaven at the rapture, but will gathered by the angels to meet Christ in the air, then return with him to enter the millennium on earth.<br />
*Prewrath Rapture - The Prewrath View (also known as Mid Tribulation Raptureplaces the rapture of the Church after the mid-point of a yet future 70th Week of Daniel--i.e., after the "abomination of desolation" - also holds that a side-by-side comparison of the wording of the sixth seal (Revelation 6:12-13) and the signs in Matthew 24:29 that announce the Second Coming of Jesus and the rapture of the Church indicate that they are the same event. Therefore, the rapture described in Matthew 24:29-31 can be placed after the sixth seal of Revelation.<br />
*Thomas Ice and the Pre Tribulation Rapture - A Dispensational-Premillennarian eschatology which affirms that the believing Church will be raptured prior to the 70th Week of Daniel (i.e., before the "tribulation" or the final seven-years of this age); likewise, this eschatology sees the coming Antichrist as a real person energized by Satan who will implement a "defense pact" or "peace treaty" with Israel at the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week. Thomas Ice of the Pre-trib Research Center is an avowed proponent of this eschatology.<br />
*Dispensationalism - In Christian theology, Dispensationalism teaches biblical history as a number of successive economies or administrations, called dispensations, each of which emphasizes the continuity of the Old Testament covenants God made with His chosen people through Abraham, Moses and King David.<br />
*Hyperdispensationalism - Hyperdispensationalism (or sometimes ultra-dispensationalism), as opposed to traditional (or mainstream) Dispensationalism, views the start of the Christian church as beginning with the ministry of the Apostle Paul after the early part of the book of Acts. Hyperdispensationalists regard the failure of the post-Apostolic church to preserve the Pauline Distinctive as a cause of the Great Apostasy and as a mistake of the 19th Century Restoration Movement. Hyperdispensationalists regard what they understand to be the recovery of true Pauline Christianity as the crowning achievement of events that began with the Protestant Reformation.<br />
*Progressive Dispensationalism - Progressive Dispensationalism is one of two views in mainstream dispensationalism, the other being the traditional view. The major difference between the traditional and progressive dispensationalist views concerns the relationship between the dispensations. Traditional dispensationalists perceive the present age of grace as an "intercalation" or parenthesis in God's plan, and therefore is unrelated to the past and future dispensations. However, progressive dispensationalists reject this idea of a parenthesis, and perceive the present age of grace as a key link or progression in relation with the past and future dispensations.<br />
*[[Eschatology]] - Eschatology (from the Greek ἔσχατος, ''eschatos'' meaning "last" + ology) is a part of theology and philosophy concerned with the final events in the history of the world or the ultimate destiny of mankind, commonly phrased as the end of the world. In many religions, the end of the world is a future event prophesied in sacred texts or folklore. More broadly, eschatology may encompass related concepts such as the Messiah or Messianic Age, the afterlife, and the soul.<br />
*Roman Catholic Eschatology - The Roman Catholic Church affirms the Amillennialism or Amillennarian worldview. Amillennialism was taught by St. Augustine in the fourth century and was a widely held view among Christians throughout Church history. Origen's idealizing tendency to consider only the spiritual as real (which was fundamental to his entire system) led him to combat the "rude" or "crude" aspects of a literal 1,000-year Messianic Kingdom yet future. Amillennialism has been widely held in the Eastern Orthodox Church as well, which generally follows Augustine on this point and which has deemed that Premillennialism cannot be safety taught. Amillennialism is also often associated with Protestants such as those in the Lutheran, Reformed and Anglican churches. (Please see Amillennialism).<br />
*Seventh-Day Adventist Eschatology - The Seventh-day Adventist church holds a unique system of eschatological (or end-times) beliefs. Adventist eschatology is characterized principally by the premillennial second coming of Jesus Christ. Seventh-day Adventism derives its eschatological teachings in large part from its interpretation of the books of Daniel and Revelation, as well as the teachings of Jesus Christ found in Matthew chapter 24. Adventists have traditionally interpreted biblical prophecies using the historicist method, although some of the prophecies of Revelation are thought have a future application. It is this futurist aspect of the church's interpretation of the book of Revelation that has played a major part in shaping Adventist eschatology.<br />
*Mormon Eschatology - In Mormonism, all Latter Day Saints are viewed as covenant, or chosen, people; they have accepted the name of Jesus Christ. Latter Day Saints do not dispute the "chosen" status of the Jewish people. In LDS doctrine all people who have ever lived will have the ability to enter into this covenant during the Millennium (yet future). Mormon eschatology holds that Jews, as a chosen people, will ultimately accept Christianity (See Jeremiah 31:31-34). Mormon doctrine teaches that Mormons are "The kin blood of the Jews." Every practicing LDS member receives a patriarchal blessing that reveals their linage in the House of Israel. This lineage may be blood related or through "adoption;" therefore, a child may not necessarily share the lineage of her parents (but will still be a member of the tribes of Israel). It is a widely held belief that most members of the faith are in the tribe of Ephraim or the tribe of Manasseh.<br />
*Jehovah's Witnesses Eschatology - The eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses is central to their religious beliefs. They believe that Jesus Christ has been ruling as king since 1914, and that after that time a short period of cleansing has begun taking place. They further believe that from 1919, Jehovah's Witnesses were selected by God to be his people. Jehovah's Witnesses believe 1918 to be the time when Christ Jesus judged all world religions. They teach that after a period of 18 months, among all groups and religions, there was found only one that was humbly doing the will of Christ. Jehovah's Witnesses claim the "Bible Students" who later became known as "Jehovah's Witnesses" in 1931 (See History of Jehovah's Witnesses) are that one unique group.<br />
*British Israelism Eschatology - Teaches that the Anglo-Saxon race are the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel; therefore, many of the prophecies pointing toward "Jewish fulfillment" are really fulfilled in the Lost Tribes. It holds, however, many of the eschatological affirmations of the Seventh-Day Adventists.<br />
*Supersessionism - Supersessionism (sometimes referred to as replacement theology by its critics) is a belief that Christianity is the fulfillment and continuation of the Old Testament, and that Jews who deny that Jesus is the Messiah are not being faithful to the revelation that God has given them, and they therefore fall short of their calling as his chosen people. This view holds that racial and ethnic divisions and boundaries are ended in Jesus Christ, and faith in Jesus unites all peoples into one new body, which is God's chosen people.<br />
*[[Messianic Judaism]] - Messianic Judaism is a religion centered on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, who is referred to as Yeshua by its adherents.<br />
*[[Apologetics]] - The field of study concerned with the systematic defense of a position.<br />
*[[Exegesis]] - The extensive and critical interpretation of a text, especially of a holy scripture<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
<br />
===Relevant Biblical texts===<br />
*[[Book of Revelation|Revelation 10, 11, 12, 13, 16-21]]<br />
*[[Genesis|Genesis 37, 39-50]]<br />
*[[Book of Daniel|Daniel 7-12]]<br />
*{{bibleverse||Zechariah|3-7|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Zechariah|10-14|NKJV}}<br />
*[[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew 24]]<br />
*[[Gospel of Luke|Luke 17:20-37; 21]]<br />
*[[Epistle to the Romans|Romans 9-11]]<br />
*{{bibleverse|I|Corinthians|15:50-58|NKJV}}<br />
*{{bibleverse|I|Thessalonians|4:13-5:15|NKJV}}<br />
*{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:1-12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
===Suggested book list===<br />
*Alnor, William M., ''Soothsayers of the Second Advent.'' Fleming H. Revell, 1989. ISBN 0-8007-5324-0<br />
*Barnhouse, Donald Grey, ''Revelation - An Expositional Commentary.'' Zondervan, 1971. ISBN 0-310-20491-7<br />
*Boston, Robert, ''Close Encounters with the Religious Right.'' Prometheus Books, 2000. ISBN 1-57392-797-X<br />
*Brog, David, ''Standing With Israel.'' Front Line, A Strang Company, 2006. ISBN 1-59185-906-9<br />
*Clarkson, Frederick, ''Eternal Hostility.'' Common Courage Press, 1997. ISBN 1-56751-088-4<br />
*Coombes, R. A., ''America, The Babylon - America's Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy'' A Real Book, 1998. ISBN 1-890622-33-8<br />
*Culver, Robert Duncan, ''Daniel and the Latter Days''. Fleming H. Revell Company, 1954. {{LCCN|54|00|5434}}<br />
*Dyer, Charles H., ''The Rise of Babylon.'' Moody Publishers, 2003. ISBN 0-8024-0905-9<br />
*Feinberg, Charles L., ''Millennialism - Two Major Views''. Moody Press, 1980. ISBN 0-8024-6815-2<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''The Church and the Tribulation.'' Zondervan, 1973. ISBN 0-310-25401-9<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''First the Antichrist.'' Baker Books, May 1997. ISBN 0-8010-5764-7<br />
*Gundry, Stanley N.; Archer, Gleason L., Jr., ''Three Views on The Rapture - Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulation.'' Zondervan, 1996. ISBN 0-310-21298-7<br />
*Hitchcock, Mark, ''Is America in Bible Prophecy?.'' Multnomah Publishers, 2002. ISBN 1-57673496-X<br />
*Hunt, Dave, ''A Cup of Trembling - Jerusalem and Bible Prophecy.'' Harvest House Publishers, 1995. ISBN 1-56507-334-7<br />
*Ironside, Harry A., ''Revelation.'' Loizeaux Brothers, 1982. ISBN 0-87213-384-2<br />
*Jeffrey, Grant R., ''Armageddon - Appointment with Destiny.'' Bantam Books, 1990. ISBN 0-553-28537-8<br />
*Juster, Dan; Intrater, Keith, ''Israel, the Church and the Last Days.'' Destiny Image Publishers, 1991. ISBN 1-56043-061-3<br />
*Krieger, Doug, ''Unsealing the End of Days: The Visions and Prophecy of Zechariah.''<ref>{{cite web |url=http://http://www.the-tribulation network.com/dougkrieger/unsealing/unsealing_by_chapter.htm|title=Unsealing the End of Days: The Visions and Prophecy of Zechariah}}</ref> (date, 2004-08-30)<br />
*Ladd, George Eldon, ''"A Commentary on the Revelation of John".'' William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972. ISBN 0-8028-1684-3<br />
*Ladd, George Eldon, ''"The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of The Second Advent and the Rapture."'' Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1956. ISBN 0-8028-1111-6<br />
*Lalonde, Peter & Patti, ''"Left Behind".'' Harvest House Publishers, 1995. ISBN 0-9636407-3-9<br />
*LaSor, William Sanford, ''"The Truth About Armageddon".'' Harper & Row, 1982. ISBN 0-06-064919-4<br />
*Lindsey, Hal, ''"Planet Earth - 2000 A.D."'' Western Front, Ltd., 1994. ISBN 0-9641058-0-2<br />
*Linker, Damon, ''"The Theocons".'' Doubleday, 2006. ISBN 978-0-385-51647-1<br />
*Paterson, Stella, ''"Calling Forth The Remnant By Way of the Cross".'' Preparing The Way Publishers, 2006. ISBN 1-929451-21-0<br />
*Pentecost, J. Dwight, ''"Things To Come".'' Dunham Publishing Company, 1962.<br />
*Perry, Richard H., ''"Of the Last Days: Listen, I Tell You a Mystery".'' Essence Publishing (Canada), July 2003. ISBN 1-55306-595-6<br />
*Pink, Arthur W., ''"The Antichrist".'' Kregel Publications, 1988. ISBN0-8254-3539-0<br />
*Rausch, David A., ''"Zionism Within Early American Fundamentalism 1878-1918 - A Convergence of Two Traditions".'' The Edwin Mellen Press, 1979. ISBN 0-88946-875-3<br />
*Ryrie, Charles Caldwell, ''"Dispensationalism Today".'' Moody Press, 1965. ISBN 0-8024-2256-X<br />
*Shearer, S. R. (Steve), ''"The Beginning of the End".'' End of the Age Ministries, 1985. {{LCCN|85|00|81941}}<br />
*Spargimino, Larry, ''"The Anti-Prophets - The Challenge of Preterism".'' Hearthstone Publishing, 2000. ISBN 1-57558-080-2<br />
*Sutton, William Josiah, ''"Ancient Prophecies About the Dragon, The Beast, and the False Prophet".'' The Institute of Religious Knowledge, 1999. ISBN 0-917013-02-6<br />
*Sutton, William Josiah, ''"The Antichrist 666".'' Teach Services, Inc., 1995. ISBN 1-57258-015-1<br />
*Walvoord, John F., ''"Every Prophecy of the Bible".'' Chariot Victory Publishing, 1999. ISBN 0-7394-0215-3<br />
*Walvoord, John F., ''"The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook". '' Victor Books, 1977. ISBN 0-89693-509-4<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''"The Church and the Tribulation".'' Zondervan, 1973. ISBN 0-310-25401-9<br />
*Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania - "''Revelation - Its Grand Climax At Hand!".'' Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., 1988.<br />
*White, E. G., ''"America in Prophecy".'' Inspiration Books East, Inc., 1888. ISBN 0-916547-04-3<br />
*Woodrow, Ralph, ''"His Truth is Marching On -Advanced Studies on Prophecy in the Light of History".'' Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Assn., Inc., 1996 Edition. ISBN 0-916938-03-04<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Two_Witnesses&diff=645777Two Witnesses2009-03-28T23:27:09Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* See also */</p>
<hr />
<div>In Christian eschatology, the '''Two Witnesses''' are two individuals, concepts or "corporate beings" described in chapter 11 of the [[Book of Revelation]] in the events leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.<br />
{{cquote|<br />
"'And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.' These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth. And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner. these have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy; and they have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to strike the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire. When they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them. And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into the graves. And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth. Now after three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, 'Come up here.' And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them. In the same hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. In the earthquake seven thousand people were killed, and the rest were afraid and gave glory to the God of heaven." (Revelation 11:3-13 - New King James Version)}}<br />
<br />
==Identity==<br />
<br />
Growing interest in the identity of the two witnesses of Revelation 11 and the timing of their appearance, has inspired Eschatological debate for centuries.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wcg.org/lit/bible/Rev/2witnesses.htm |title=The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Kroll |first=Paul |year=1999 |publisher=Worldwide Church of God}}</ref> Are they two literal individuals or are they symbolic of a concept (e.g., the Old and New Testaments of the Bible<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tagnet.org/cyberspace/Lessons/Fut-057/fut1-057.html|title=If I Were Told the Future -- Lesson 57: The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |year=2002 |work=Cyberspace Ministry}}</ref>) or corporate entities which symbolize peoples? Are they here now<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/herenow.htm |title=Are The Two Witnesses Here Now? |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Blank |first=Wayne |work=Daily Bible Study |publisher=The Church of God}}</ref> if they are personified - or are they yet future, as millenarian [[Hal Lindsey]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:lQb5fAcu260J:www.raptureready.com/featured/HalLindsey.html+Hal+Lindsey+The+Two+Witnesses&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5|title=Hal Lindsey}}</ref> claims they are - ready to appear on the [[Apocalypse|apocalyptic]] scene, along with the [[Antichrist]]? Perhaps they represent the witnessing Church<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.apocalipsis.org/downloads/revelatn.pdf |title=Revelation: A Reference Commentary |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Taylor |first=R A |date=[[2000]]-[[03-17]] |format=PDF |pages=111-112}} </ref> since Jesus sent out his disciples "two by two".<ref>Mark 6:7.</ref> On the other hand, could they be some form of reincarnation<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.elevated.fsnet.co.uk/index-page14.html |title=Reincarnation and Christianity |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Millett |first=Michael G |work=Elevated Therapy International}}</ref> of Moses and Elijah<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=77&cuItem_itemID=14532|title=WELS Topical Q&A: Endtime/Prophecies Two Witnesses|accessdate=2007-06-26 |year=2007 |work=Communication Services |publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod}}</ref> because both of them were prophets; Moses<ref>Exodus 7:16-18.</ref> struck the waters of the Nile and they turned into blood; and Elijah<ref>1 Kings 17:1-7.</ref> commanded the heavens that it rained not and did so for three-and-one-half years.<ref>James 5:17.</ref> Indeed, the other witness may be Enoch<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.apocalypsesoon.org/xfile-11.html |title=Eight Good Reasons Why Enoch Must Be One of the Two Witnesses! |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Wunderlich |first=Bob |work=Apocalypse Soon: The Xcellent Files}}</ref> (i.e., Elijah and Enoch), because he, like Elijah "was taken"<ref>Hebrews 11:5.</ref> (i.e., did not suffer physical death). They could simply be two Jewish prophets (as the ''[[Left Behind]] Series'' claims<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.leftbehind.com/channelfree.asp?pageid=1284&channelID=175 |title=Who Are the Two Witnesses? |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=LaHaye |first=Tim, et al. |year=2004 |work=The Authorized Left Behind Handbook}}</ref>) who in the period of the 70th Week of Daniel (yet future or partial<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/m.sion/70wedan9.htm|title=Daniel 9:24-27|accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Amy |first=Stephen |work=Worship at the Altar}}</ref> come in the power of Moses and Elijah and are representative of the law (Moses) and the prophets (Elijah)).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://biblia.com/bible/rev11.htm |title=The Temple... and the Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Dominguez |first=J}}</ref> Indeed, some claim that the notion of a yet future 70th Week of Daniel is a Catholic (Jesuit) conspiracy<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.godssabbathtruth.com/sabbath-antichrist.html |title=The Great Catholic Diversion Revealed |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=2006 |work=Sabbath & Antichrist Truth Revealed |publisher=GodsSabbathTruth.com}}</ref> to take the heat off the papacy as the "seat of the antichrist system"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?2617&collectionID=795&contentID=4441&shortcutID=5297|title=Statement on the Antichrist |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=2007 |work=CICR: WELS Doctrinal Statements |publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod}}</ref> and to place the onus on a yet future and literal person who will be the incarnation of Satan himself<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thepropheticyears.com/The%20book%20of%20Revelation/Revelation%20Chapter%2017.htm |title=Revelation chapter 17 commentary |accessdate=2007-06-27 |last=Koenig |first=Don |year=2004 |work=The Revelation of Jesus Christ Through the Ages}}</ref> - who, as the beast will "make war against them, overcome them, and kill them"<ref>Revelation 11:7.</ref> -- hence, this prophecy of a future personification of "The Antichrist" is erroneous and has already been fulfilled<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/m.sion/da70fufu.htm |title=Daniel's 70th Week--Future or Fulfilled? |accessdate=2007-06-27 |publisher=Used by permission from Ralph Woodrow}}</ref> in history. To be certain - Roman Catholic eschatology affirms the coming of the Antichrist.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm |title=Antichrist |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=1907 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref><br />
<br />
Their description as "two olive trees and two lampstands"<ref>Revelation 11:4.</ref> is taken as symbolism and/or allegorical. This [[Hermeneutics|hermeneutical]] approach to the Bible is adjudged by some as "hyper-allegorical"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07303b.htm |title=Hesychius of Jerusalem |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=1907 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> juxtaposed to a more "[[Biblical literalism|literal"]] interpretation; however, those who adhere to a Christian fundamentalist reading of the Bible (i.e., [[Biblical inerrancy|inerrancy]]) do not find common ground on the exposition of the identity of these Two Witnesses. Through commentary and exposition<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.preceptaustin.org/tool_commentary.htm |title=Bible Commentaries |accessdate=2007-06-27 |date=[[2007]]-[[06-07]] |publisher=Precept Austin}}</ref> the Two Witnesses could be considered as both symbolic and as literal (i.e., representative of peoples). Controversy over the symbolic, as well as literal interpretations of the Two Witnesses, as Israel<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/two_witnesses.htm |title=Israel and the Church as the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11 and Daniel 12 |accessdate=2007-06-29 |publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (the "two olive trees") and the Church (the "two lampstands") creates a great deal of eschatological debate<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/lasttrumpet_2000/debate_1a.html |title=Dichotomy or Continuity Between the Present and Past Dispensations: Opening Argument |accessdate=2007-06-29 |last=Warner |first=Tim |date=[[2002]]-[[08-07]] |work=Progressive Dispensationalism: Debate Between Dr. Mal Couch & Tim Warner |publisher=Conservative Theological Society}}</ref> between strict Dispensationalists and Progressive Dispensationalists;<ref name="warner-intro">{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/~lasttrumpet/ |title=Introduction & Methodology |accessdate=2007-06-29 |last=Warner |first=Tim |date= |year=2002 |month=November |work=The Last Trumpet |publisher=Post-Trib Research Center}}</ref> whereas such debate may be considered as non sequitur insofar as [[Preterism|Preterists]] and Historicists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.historicism.net/ |title=Historicism Research Foundation |accessdate=2006-06-30}}</ref> whose views of the Two Witnesses place them outside the chronological timeline (70 AD for Preterists)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.preterist.org/whatispreterism.asp |title=What is the Preterist View of Bible Prophecy? |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=2007 |publisher=International Preterist Association}}</ref> or wholly in the realm of the symbolic - relegated to the Church only in any future unfolding of prophecy as seen by many Historicists.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.historicism.com/Haynes/2witness.htm |title=The Meaning of the "Two Witnesses" |accessdate=2007-06-30 |last=Haynes |first=J. L |work=Historicism.com}}</ref><br />
<br />
Views among those who adhere to a literal one-thousand years [[Premillennialism|premillennial]] earthly kingdom (i.e., the millennium is yet future) complicate the Church's participation in the 70th Week of Daniel (i.e., yet future). The three dominant positions among these Premillenarians (be they evangelical,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wheaton.edu/isae/defining_evangelicalism.html |title=Defining Evangelicalism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=2005 |month=April |publisher=Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals}}</ref> Catholic<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10307a.htm |title=Millennium and Millenarianism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=1911 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> or Orthodox<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:F7d0BUBkjf4J:www.conservativeonline.org/journals/02_04_journal/1998v2n4_id02.htm+Early+Church+Fathers+Millenarians&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1 |title=The Early Church Fathers and the Foundations of Dispensationalism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |last=Crutchfield |first=Larry V}}</ref> Christians - and for that matter, among other Christian sects)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=21209 |title=Christian Millenarianism/Indiana University Press |accessdate=2007-06-30}}</ref> regarding the final 70th Week of Daniel insofar as the Church's participation concerns are: Pretribulational<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/rr-pretribulation-rapture.html |title=The Pretribulation Rapture |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Strandberg |first=Todd |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> (the Church will rapture<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/search-results.php?author=3&related=true |title=Other articles by Dr. Thomas Ice |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |year=2003 |publisher=Pre-Trib Research Center}}</ref> at the commencement of the 70th Week of Daniel),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://jesus-is-the-way.com/RevOutline.html |title=Outline and Chronology of Endtimes in the Book of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-19 |date=[[2007]]-[[05-27]]|work=Jesus-is-the-way.com}}</ref> whose commencement is normally announced by the infamous "Treaty of Hell and Death"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gotlinks.com/earticles/articles/107731-your-covenant-with-death___your-agreement-with-hell___the-u_s_-israel-strategic-alliance.html |title=Your Covenant with Death...Your Agreement With Hell...The U.S.-Israel Strategic Alliance |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Krieger |first=Doug |date=[[2005]]-[[12-25]]}}</ref> (i.e., the treaty or "defense pact" of the Antichrist with Israel);<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/pdf/Ice-TheIsraeliElections.pdf |title=The Israeli Elections |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |format=PDF |work=Pre-trib.org}}</ref> Mid-Tribulational<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nobts.edu/Faculty/ItoR/LemkeSW/Personal/midtribulationism.html |title=The Biblical Case for Mid-Tribulationalism |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Lemke |first=Steve W}} </ref> or "Pre-Wrath"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/athens/forum/5951/prewrath.html |title=A review of the Pre-Wrath rapture of the Church |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Stanton |first=Gerald B}}</ref> (the Church will be raptured in the middle of Daniel's 70th Week - i.e., after approximately three-and-one-half years); and Post-Tribulational<ref name="warner-intro"/> (the Church will be raptured will take place at the end of the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.intergate.com/~subi/linksecc.htm |title=The Return of Jesus Christ |accessdate=2007-08-23}}</ref> just prior to the "wrath of God"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0026.html |title=Are the seals of Revelation 6 the wrath of God? |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Lee-Warner |first=Bill |work=Sola Scriptura}}</ref> or "wrath of the Lamb").<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/worldview_3/2prewrath.html |title=The "Pre-Wrath Rapture Teaching" Evaluated |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Totten |first=Rhett |year=1999 |work=The Second Coming of Christ and Rapture Site}}</ref> Some theologians believe that the two olive branches represent the peace on Earth that the witnesses try to bring to the sinful Earth, and the two lampstands represent the light for Christ that they shine for Christ. <br />
<br />
Post-Tribulational icon Dr. Robert H. Gundry (Westmont College) states in his classic, ''The Church and the Tribulation'',<ref>ISBN 978-0310254010</ref> especially in reference to Post-tribulationalism and the identity of the Two Witnesses - having both the Church and Israel throughout the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy presents formidable eschatological challenges to wit:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“If the Church is to go through the tribulation, God will work simultaneously with two groups of covenant people, Israel and the Church. Millenarians of all varieties, including pretribulationists, should find the possibility of such simultaneous workings hard to deny . . . But it is not merely a matter of dealing with two groups at once. It is a matter of dealing simultaneously with, and through, two groups of redeemed people and witnesses. Will two diverse groups of saints, those who belong to the Church and those who belong to Israel coexist on earth and perhaps live according to different regulations? If so, will the tribulational Church be composed exclusively of Gentile believers? Will two distinct companies of witnesses preach the Gospel, maybe variations of it? Such questions arise quite naturally if we take the tribulation as transitional. But the mere existence of these questions does not preclude the possibility of the presence of the Church in the tribulation.” (''The Church and the Tribulation'', Robert H. Gundry, Zondervan Publishing House, 1973, p. 23).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
What Gundry suggests is anathema to strict Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/disp/disp2.html |title=Dispensationalism and its errors Part 2 |accessdate=2007-08-23 |work=Sean's Faith Website}}</ref> whose pre-tribulationalism demands a complete separation of the Church from Israel<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.reformationtheology.com/2006/06/pretribpremillleft_behind.php |title=Pre-Trib?...Pre-Mill?....Left Behind |accessdate=2007-08-23 |date=[[2006]]-[[06-23]] |work=Reformation Theology}} Quoting from Samuel E. Waldron, ''The End Times Made Simple''.</ref> and a primary commitment of the Almighty to Israel within the crucible of the 70th Week of Daniel--although Dispensationalists recognize a redemptive witness to the Gentiles through the evangelistic witness of the 144,000<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0023.html |title=Who are the 144,000? |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Cooper |first=Charles |work=Sola Scriptura}}</ref> Jewish evangelists. Those "saints"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/rr-tribulation-saint.html |title=Tribulation Saint Wannabes |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Strandberg |first=Todd |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> evangelized through this preaching of the "gospel of the kingdom"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/AnInterpretationofMatthew24_25_12.html |title=An Interpretation of Matthew 24—25, Part XII |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> and who perish under the onslaught of the beast, constitute the tribulation saints<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.plymouthbrethren.com/cactrib.htm |title=Tribulation Saints (extract) |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Coates |first=C. A |work=PlymouthBrethren.com}}</ref> who "come out of great tribulation."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.grantjeffrey.com/article/why_some_reject.htm |title=Why Do Some Teach that the Church will Endure the Tribulation? |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Jeffrey |first=Grant R |work=Prophecy On Line |publisher=Grant R. Jeffrey Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
==Religious-political ramifications of Israel and the Church==<br />
<br />
Obvious collaboration between the "witnesses" is "eschatologically suggested" by those who espouse the two to be Israel and the Church--what form of cooperative witness seems crucial; especially with regards to the religious-political ramifications thereof. Naturally, evangelical support for the nation of Israel is viewed by a growing number of Israeli Jews, as well as diasporic Jews (especially Zionists), as beneficial to the survival of Israel and highly influential upon American foreign policy,<ref>{{cite news |first=David D |last=Kirkpatrick |title=For Evangelicals, Supporting Israel Is ‘God's Foreign Policy’ |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14israel.html?ex=1321160400&en=60ed9b6dede3816e&ei=5090 |work=The New York Times |date=[[2006]]-[[11-14]] |accessdate=2007-08-24}}</ref> whether the imagery of the Two Witnesses is reflected in this Evangelical-Jewish Zionist alliance or not. Furthermore, if the book of Revelation is to be viewed as a cosmic courtroom wherein the "Great City" is on trial, and the "Judge of all the earth" is pending a conviction by calling forth witnesses to "testify" against Babylon the Great (i.e., "the Holy City" vs. the "Great City" or New Jerusalem vs. Babylon the Great)<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000026.htm#26c |title=Chapter VIII: Tribulation & Judgment |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Shearer |first=S.R |work=The New Antipas Papers |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref> - then "Biblical collaboration" at the mouth of "two witnesses"<ref>Deuteronomy 19:15.</ref> prior to a conviction and ultimate sentence would be mandatory.<br />
<br />
David Brog, former chief counsel and later chief of staff to Senator Arlen Specter, recently highlighted the current support for Israel, among evangelical Christians in his book ''Stand with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State''.<ref>ISBN 978-1591859062.</ref> Brog's central thesis, both as a Jewish American and as the current Executive Director of the newly-formed Christians United for Israel, is unabashedly pro-Israel,<ref>{{cite news |first=Margot |last=Patterson |title=Evangelicals rally for Israel, warn of Iran threat |url=http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2006c/072806/072806h.php |work=National Catholic Reporter |date=[[2006]]-[[07-28]] |accessdate=2007-08-24}}</ref> and affirms that evangelical support for Israel should be encouraged by American Jews, as well as provide a forum for evangelical Christians to express their views on Capitol Hill. He is at the helm in galvanizing support for this newly-founded Evangelical-Jewish lobbying organization<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060814/new_christian_zionism |title=Birth Pangs of a New Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Blumenthal |first=Max |date=[[2006]]-[[08-08]] |work=TheNation.com}}</ref> on behalf of Israel. Brog, who is Jewish-not a Christian, has an executive board for Christians United for Israel consisting of prominent evangelicals: Michael Little,<ref name="cufi">{{cite web |url=http://www.cufi.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_executive_board |title=Executive Board |accessdate=2007-08-25 |year=2007 |publisher=Christians United for Israel}}</ref> [[John Hagee]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3323758,00.html |title=A blessing or a curse? American evangelists explained |accessdate=2007-08-25 |last=Benhorin |first=Yitzhak |date=[[2006]]-[[11-05]] |work=Ynetnews.com}}</ref> Gary Bauer,<ref name="cufi"/> and George Morrison<ref name="cufi"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fbci.org/aboutus/george.html |title=Meet Pastor George |accessdate=2007-08-25 |publisher=Faith Bible Chapel}}</ref> — all evangelicals, and all actively engaged in pro-Israel activities — activities which include "A Night to Honor Israel"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jhm.org/honorisrael.asp |title=A Night To Honor Israel |accessdate=2007-08-26 |work=John Hagee Ministries}}</ref> held throughout North America, as well as recent involvement<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5193092.stm |title=Evangelical Christians plead for Israel |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Greene |first=Richard Allen |date=[[2006]]-[[07-19]] |work=BBC News}}</ref> in the annual AIPAC gathering in Washington, D.C.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:tyCLPx6SrFUJ:www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w050523&s=baer052605+AIPAC+COURTS+EVANGELICALS&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5 |title=Security Measures |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Baer |first=Kenneth |date=[[2005]]-[[05-26]] |work=TNR Online |publisher=The New Republic}}</ref> ([[Jerry Falwell]] was also a member of the executive board of Christians United for Israel until his death.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cufi.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_press_releases#Falwell |title=Dr. Jerry Falwell- A Pioneer of Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Hagee |first=John |date=[[2007]]-[[05-16]] |work=Christians United for Israel}}</ref>) Such support for Israel is vehemently opposed by many on the left and right.<br />
<br />
Christian Zionism – a phenomenon commenced in Great Britain<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4959.htm |title=Christians and Zion: British stirrings |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Wagner |first=Donald |date=[[2003]]-[[10-09]] |work=The Daily Star |publisher=Information Clearing House}}</ref> in support of the Jewish State and championed by many American evangelical leaders<ref>{{cite web |url=http://mb-soft.com/believe/text/czionism.htm |title=Christian Zionism: Advanced Information |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Rausch |first=D A |year=1997 |month=May |work=Elwell Evangelical Dictionary |publisher=BELIEVE Religious Information Source}}</ref> throughout the past century, sees in Israel's rebirth the fulfillment of Bible prophecy<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewsonfirst.org/06bprint/fp013p.html |title=Mr. Hagee Draws Evangelicals By Arguing Jewish State Fulfills Biblical Prophecy |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Higgins |first=Andrew |date=[[2006]]-[[07-27]] |work=The Wall Street Journal |publisher=JewsOnFirst.org}}</ref> and the countdown to the Second Coming of Christ.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/07/10/MN17001.DTL |title=U.S. Christians find cause to aid Israel: Evangelicals financing immigrants, settlements |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Haas |first=Danielle |date=[[2002]]-[[07-10]] |work=San Francisco Chronicle |pages=A-1}}</ref> The proliferation of evangelical Christian organizations or Jewish organizations reaching out to one another with the common goal of supporting the survival of the nation of Israel in the U.S. and elsewhere includes: Bridges for Peace<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bridgesforpeace.com/h2n.php?fn=whoarewe.html |title=A Concise Summary of Who We Are |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2006 |publisher=Bridges for Peace}}</ref>; the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ifcj.org/site/PageServer?pagename=endorsements_ministries |title=Churches and Ministries that Support Israel |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2007 |publisher=International Fellowship of Christians and Jews}}</ref>; the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.icej.org/articles/about_us |title=About Us: Your Embassy in Jerusalem |accessdate=2007-09-09 |publisher=International Christian Embassy Jerusalem}}</ref>; Operation Exodus<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.operation-exodus.org/Operation-Exodus/about_ebenezer |title=About Ebenezer |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2007 |work=Operation Exodus |publisher=Ebenezer Emergency Fund International}}</ref>; Israel Awareness Day<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.easy-access.com/Ariel/Autumn96/Aut96-Page4.html |title=Faith Bible Chapel Adopts Ariel |accessdate=2007-12-16 |year=1996 |month=Autumn |work=Shalom Ariel |publisher=Ariel Development Fund |pages=4-5}}</ref> (and their writings<ref name="standing">{{cite book |last=Brog |first=David |title=Standing with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State |year=2006 |publisher=Frontline |isbn=9781591859062}}</ref> attest as well). Likewise, but with less verbosity are those mainline Christian organizations<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.loveandjustice.org/AlternateVoice/index.htm |title=Alternative Voice to Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |publisher=First Congregational Church}}</ref> and some evangelical leaders<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=2717 |title=The Evangelical-Jewish Alliance |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Wagner |first=Donald |date=[[2003]]-[[06-28]] |work=The Christian Century |pages=20-24}}</ref> (along with their writings)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.christianzionism.org/articlesN.asp |title=Challenging Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |year=2007}}</ref> who oppose the current alliance between Jews and evangelicals in support of Israel and her policies.<br />
<br />
Most evangelical churches and organizations in the USA in support of Israel are Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:jCEzcYlEhh4J:psreview.org/content/view/45/99/+Premillenarian+support+for+Israel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=12|title=Premillenarian}}</ref> in their ''Weltanschauung'' – with the majority being pretribulational;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:JPO9QHB5P2EJ:www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1746536/posts?page=14+Pre-Trib+and+Pro-Israel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4|title=pretribulational;}}</ref> hence, criticism on the part of many Jews that the main purpose of such support for Israel among evangelicals is self-interest and spurious at best,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewsonfirst.org/christian_zionists.php |title=Christian Zionists: Fundamentalist Christians' support of Israel could blunt Jewish opposition to religious right agenda |accessdate=2007-12-16 |work=Jews On First!}}</ref> and conversionary<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/christianzionism.html |title=Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Krusch |first=David |year=2007 |work=Jewish Virtual Library |publisher=American-Israeli Cooperative Exchange}}</ref> at worst. Furthermore, some evangelicals propose that the current Evangelical-Jewish alliance in support of Israel will not last and is contrary to Bible prophecy.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000140.htm |title=The Religious Right and Israel; A Relationship That Cannot Hold, Part III |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Shearer |first=S.R. |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
In addition to these suspicions from both Jews and evangelical Christians, there is religious-political angst expressed amongst co-religionists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000243.htm |title=The Neo-Conservatives |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Shearer |first=S. R |date=[[2006]]-[[12-12]] |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref> (Jewish and Christian) who view this Jewish-Christian solidarity on behalf of Israel as a mixture of Church and State and ''ipso facto'' contrary to the American experiment;<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=1174 |title=Renewing the American Experiment: A Post Election Reflection |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Korten |first=David |date=2004-11-07 |work=Yes! Online}}</ref> especially, as it pertains to [[neoconservatives|neocons]] both within<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.counterpunch.org/green02282004.html |title=Serving Two Flags: Neo-Cons, Israel and the Bush Administration |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Green |first=Stephen |date=2004-02-28 |work=Counterpunch}}</ref> and without<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.alternet.org/story/15481/ |title=All in the Neocon Family |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Lobe |first=Jim |date=2003-03-27 |work=AlterNet |publisher=Independent Media Institute}}</ref> the immediate US political administration, who some say are egging the alliance forward to suffice their own socio-political agenda and have little or no spiritual interest in the dynamic. They point out that ''theocons'' (in particular American Catholics),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=518 |title=RJN: Neocons v. Theocons: The Sequel |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Neuhaus |first=Richard John |date=2006-11-03 |work=First Things: On the Square}}</ref> who are allied with neocons (notwithstanding Jewish suspicions from time to time among the neocons)<ref>{{cite journal |last=Moore |first=Scott H. |year=1998 |month=Winter |title=The End of Convenient Stereotypes: How the ''First Things'' and Baxter Controversies Inaugurate Extraordinary Politics |journal=Pro Ecclesia |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=17–47 |url=http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/essays/Stereotypes.html |accessdate= 2007-12-18}}</ref> are drawing American evangelicals, who affirm they are under "Biblical mandate" to "bless Israel",<ref name="standing"/> into a religio-politico maelstrom<ref>{{cite press release |title=Cliff Potts Releases Theocon Nation: The Unvarnished, Politically Incorrect Truth About the Roots, Threat and Response to the Religious Right Political Movement |date=[[2006]]-[[05-26]] |url=http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/5/prweb390704.htm |accessdate=2007-12-18}}</ref> which, in the end, will politicize the American Church<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/prophetic_sequence_pt12.htm |title=Theo-Neo-Paleo Cons: …I saw a woman mounted on a Scarlet-colored Beast (Rev. 17:3 – ASV/the Message: Part XII – The Prophetic Sequence |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Krieger |first=Doug |publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> and compromise her "spiritual mission" and put America into a "crusader" mindset<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.damonlinker.com/ |title=Damon Linker |accessdate=2007-12-24 |last=Linker |first=Damon}}</ref> in defeating [[Islamism|radical Islamists]] and hedonist [[secularism]] in America, rather than fulfilling the ''Great Commission'' of Jesus in the saving of souls for the coming [[Premillennialism|premillenarian]] kingdom, not the [[Kingdom Now theology|"kingdom now"]]. Instead, Theocons are now about galvanizing Evangelicals and Catholics<ref>{{cite news |title=Evangelicals & Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium |url=http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9405/articles/mission.html |work=First Things |pages=15-22 |date=May 1994 |accessdate=2007-12-24}}</ref> in a great crusade against American hedonistic secularization and, interestingly enough, Israel is inadvertently caught up within that dynamic.<br />
<br />
==Exegetical considerations==<br />
<br />
In attempting to [[Biblical exegesis|exegete]] Revelation 11 commentators who hold to a Premillenarian eschatology generally fall into three areas of interpretation in the identification of the Two Witnesses: (1) The Two Witnesses are individuals either manifested in some form of reincarnation; or “in the spirit” of Biblical prophets who once appeared in Bible history; or simply as two individuals newly arrived on the earth; (2) the Two Witnesses are corporate in nature (human) standing for the Church only or for Israel only; or both Israel and the Church; or for both Jewish and Gentiles believers in Jesus; and (3) the Two Witnesses express Biblical concepts (i.e., the Old and New Testaments; the Law and the Prophets; Mercy and Grace).<br />
<br />
Their chronological order aside, the purpose and destiny of the Two Witnesses is to decry the reign of the Antichrist-Beast,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tribulation.com/beast.htm |title=The Dragon and Two Beasts of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-26 |date=[[2006-09-21]] |work=Tribulation.com |publisher=Atlantis Station}}</ref> and to attest against that “Great City”— (or Whore of Babylon, Babylon the Great. Likewise, in that they are called to “prophesy” and wear “sackcloth”<ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:3|141}}</ref> (a Biblical designation of a “call to repentance”) they assuredly are at the nexus of announcing the “gospel of the kingdom.”<ref>{{bibleverse||Matthew|24:14|141}}</ref><br />
<br />
John's Apocalypse (i.e., The Revelation of Jesus Christ) is considered by most Christian theologians to be the apostolic writings which incorporate more Hebrew (i.e., Old Testament) Scriptures into the text than any other book of the New Testament.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=1171 |title=Premillennialism in the Old Testament (Part 1) |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Fruchtenbaum |first=Arnold G. |date=[[2006-10-26]] |work=Believer's Web}}</ref> The images, symbolism, and allegorical language used throughout the Revelation are impossible to fathom or interpret without a fairly comprehensive knowledge of the original "Testament".<br />
<br />
===Israel and the Church as the “corporate witness"===<br />
<br />
Interconnected with Revelation 11, as some commentators have acknowledged<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.teachinghearts.org/dre17hrev11.html |title=Lesson 15: The Two Witnesses(Revelation 11)|accessdate=2007-08-26}}</ref>, is the imagery found in the latter part of {{bibleverse||Revelation|10:8-10|141}}:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Then the voice which I heard from heaven spoke to me again and said, ‘Go, take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel who stands on the sea and on the earth.’ So I went to the angel and said to him, ‘Give me the little book.’ And he said to me, ‘Take and eat it; and it will make your stomach bitter, but it will be as sweet as honey in your mouth.’ Then I took the little book out of the angel's hand and ate it, and it was as sweet as honey in my mouth. But when I had eaten it, my stomach became bitter. And he said to me, ‘You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
John becomes a symbol of prophetic witness to the world—becoming wholly identified with the prophetic message; and, subsequently, that prophetic witness must be declared: “You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings.” Then John is given a “reed like a measuring rod” and told to “Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there. But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles . . . and they (the Gentiles) will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.”<ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:2|141}}</ref><br />
<br />
The “court” referenced here appears to be an allusion to the “Court of the Gentiles”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bible-history.com/jewishtemple/JEWISH_TEMPLEThe_Court_of_the_Gentiles.htm |title=The Court of the Gentiles |accessdate=2007-08-26}}</ref> which during the sacerdotal rites in ancient Jerusalem provided “uncircumcised gentiles” who were interested in the Jewish religion to venture into the temple complex but not into the area of the sacrificial altar; hence, they were not full participants and remained on the peripheral of full commitment; unless, of course, they were willing to be circumcised. Numerous Christian commentaries perceive the issue of circumcision as a matter of the heart and the cutting away of the “flesh” an experiential expression of Christian commitment to holiness and sanctification--Paul, the Apostle, repeatedly enunciates deeper understanding of "spiritual circumcision"<ref>{{bibleverse||Romans|2:28-29|141}}; {{bibleverse||Philippians|3:8|141}}; {{bibleverse||Colossians|2:11|141}}.</ref><br />
<br />
Those willing to “pay the price” – having their flesh cut off (i.e., their “hearts dealt with”) – are those “measured at the altar of sacrifice.”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://pastorbryan.blogspot.com/2006/11/inner-life.html |title=The Inner Life |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Galloway |first=Bryan |date=[[2006-11-21]] |work=Praying for Revival!}}</ref> Hence, immediately following this imagery, the “holy city”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ucg.org/booklets/RV/twowomen.htm |title=The Two Women of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-26 |year=2007 |work=The Book of Revelation Unveiled |publisher= United Church of God}}</ref> is mentioned for the first time in the Revelation. Some commentators have recognized this connection and affirm that the “holy city” and those measured at the altar are one in the same.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://users.bigpond.net.au/bkolberg/chapters/chapter20.html |title=Revelation 11 and the Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Kolberg |first=Bruno |work=Daniel's Fourth Kingdom}}</ref> Ultimately, it is that “holy city” which is juxtaposed to the “great city” in other portions of the Revelation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wcg.org/lit/prophecy/babylon.htm |title=Who Is "Babylon"? |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Kroll |first=Paul |publisher=Worldwide Church of God}}</ref> Likewise, the first mentioning of the “great city” occurs in Revelation 11, verse 8. The ultimate expression of the "divine masterpiece" (i.e., the work of God, "the Woman, the Lamb's Bride" is viewed as the New Jerusalem in {{bibleverse||Revelation|21:10-21|141}}, along with two proper names describing her gates and foundations: "twelve gates . . . with names written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel . . . twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (again, Israel and the Church). Once the holy city is announced as the receptacle of gentile antagonism (tread the holy city underfoot), there is the immediate prophetic declaration:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth. <ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:3}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Thus, John's representation of the prophet is now “transferred” to the prophetic ministry of the Two Witnesses. The disclosure that these Two Witnesses (the Greek word for witness is ''martus'' (μαρτυς), which is also translated as "martyr"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRGRK31.htm#S3144 |title=King James Bible Strong's Greek Dictionary |accessdate=2007-12-24}}</ref>) foretells their ultimate destiny. Furthermore, they are immediately identified as: "These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth" (Revelation 11:4).<br />
<br />
Those embracing Israel and the Church as the Two Witnesses identify the number "two"<ref>{{cite book |last=Bullinger |first=E. W. |title=Number in Scripture: Its Supernatural Design and Spiritual Significance |origyear=1921 |url=http://philologos.org/__eb-nis/two.htm |accessdate=2007-12-24 |edition=4th ed. rev. |year=2001 |publisher=Eyre & Spottiswoode (Bible Warehouse) |location=London}}</ref> connoting the “witness of Israel”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://christianactionforisrael.org/witness/witness.html |title=Witness to the Nations |accessdate=2007-12-25 |publisher=Christian Action for Israel}}</ref> to the gentile nations during the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks{{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}; as well as the fact that the "olive tree"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.levitt.com/essays/olivetree.html |title=What is the Olive Tree? |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=McCall |first=Thomas S. |year=2001 |month=March |work=Levitt Letter |publisher=Zola Levitt Ministries}}</ref> in the Scripture signifies Israel. The "witness of the Church" is signified by the "two lampstands"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.restoringthevision.com/Ch11RtheV.htm |title=Restoring the Vision of the End Times Church |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Kuenzi |first=Vernon L. |year=2001}}</ref> whose identity was disclosed by the “seven golden lampstands” (i.e., candlesticks) revealed in Revelation 2-3 as the “churches.”<br />
<br />
Furthermore, this imagery clearly harkens back to Zechariah 4 and the “two sons of oil” or “two olive trees” who astride the “golden lamp stand” seen by [[Zechariah]] the prophet.<ref>Zechariah 4:2-4, 11-14.</ref> Zerubbabel, the governor, and Joshua the High Priest (the kingship and the priesthood) are seen by the Almighty wholly empowered for the rebuilding of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem or ''Third Temple'' after its destruction under [[Nebuchadrezzar II|King Nebuchadnezzar II]]: “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord.”<ref>Zechariah 4:6.</ref> <br />
<br />
Extending Zechariah's vision to the Revelation, John sees in the midst of the seven golden lamp stands, “one like unto the Son of Man.” Therefore, as Zechariah's vision saw the “kingship and the priesthood” on either side of the “universal lamp stand” – even so, that prophetic illumination is seen in the Revelation as the Son of Man, the “spirit of prophecy” disseminating light and life to the churches as the present “work of God” – as the work of the Almighty was expressed in Zechariah 4 – the work of God is expressed in Revelation 1 and confirmed by the bringing together in testimony and witness the ministry of the prophet; thus, is Christ's work as “prophet, priest, and king”<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:LKLx-OjNTEkJ:www.modernreformation.org/kr95triple.htm+Zechariah+4+-+Christ+is+Prophet,+Priest,+and+King&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2|title=king"}}</ref> fully declared through the Two Witnesses.<br />
<br />
Again, those who hold to the “corporate nature” of these Two Witnesses point out that the further disclosures of what they “do” over against who they “are” does not negate their identities but affirms that their witness is to the earth (i.e., Israel – turning the waters into blood and striking “the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire”) and to the heavens (i.e., the Church – “have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy”). Here, the Apostle Paul's writings of the Church's “heavenly stature” confirms such a witness; whereas Israel's call to be a “light to the gentiles” confirms their original commission.<ref>Ephesians 6:10-13.</ref><br />
<br />
Those<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/articles/individualism_and_the_american_church.htm |title=Individualism and the American Church ... How American Culture Distorts our Perception of the Church |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=Shearer |first=Douglas R. |date=1993-06-29 |work=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> adhering to a corporate expression of the Two Witnesses point out that “Reformational Christianity”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://thebigpicture.homestead.com/files/CHRISTIANITYANDCULTURE.html |title=Christianity and Culture: The Case for Reformational Cultural Activism |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=Strauss |first=Gideon |date=1992-10-02}}</ref> has distorted our perception (especially in America) of one's identity. By this is meant that the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] and [[Protestant Reformation|Reformation]] laid stress upon one's “individualism” (i.e., salvation is a “personal encounter with Christ” and not a salvivic experience through one's identity with the Church—“saved in the Church”). It is this identification with the individual juxtaposed to one's personhood reflected in the collective group that misses the spiritual dimension of Revelation 11 (i.e., “in Christ” or “in Adam” connotes corporate identification).<ref>1 Corinthians 15:22.</ref><br />
<br />
Once they “finish their testimony” the unveiling, and first mention in the Revelation of the ''The Beast'' who ascends out of the ''bottomless pit'', is made. They pay the uttermost price for their testimony: “the beast . . . will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them” (Rev. 11:7). The word used for ''war'' in the Greek connotes a major conflagration, not a skirmish or interpersonal struggle; thereby drawing attention to the corporate nature of the conflict between the beast and the Two Witnesses; for the beast would not make ''war'' against two individuals (Greek: ''polemos'' - see Strong's Greek 4171).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRGRK41.htm|title=4171).}}</ref><br />
<br />
Then their “body” (the Greek singular is used: ''ptoma''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/STRGRK44.htm#S4430|title=''ptoma''}}</ref> -meaning ''corpes'') lies exposed in the “street of the great city” which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” (vs. 8). To illustrate that this city is the “great city” juxtaposed to the “holy city” – and not Jerusalem – the ''Spirit Filled Life Bible'' footnote affirms these witnesses face off with the worldly system, the great city, headed up by the beast: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The great city is not literally the physical city of Jerusalem, but spiritually the world in rebellion against God. Sodom symbolizes immorality, and Egypt symbolizes the political oppression of the people of God in this world where our Lord was crucified. (''The Spirit Filled Life Bible'', Thomas Nelson Bibles,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.seekgod.ca/hayford.htm|title=Bibles,}}</ref> P. 1831)<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
This argument is reinforced by Rev. 11:8 pointedly stating that the great city is “spiritually” or “allegorically” called Sodom and Egypt—and Jerusalem is never mentioned in the text; however, many commentators do not see a problem in this—because the phrase “where also our Lord was crucified” must mean Jerusalem; for Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem. Others counter—Jesus was crucified “outside the camp”<ref>Hebrews 13:13.</ref>– “outside the gate”<ref>Hebrews 13:12.</ref> (not in Jerusalem proper) by the Romans (gentiles) and this Revelation passage appears to back this notion of the “great city” doing the work of crucifixion.<br />
<br />
Posttribulationists,<ref>{{Citation |last=Willems |first=Arthur G. |title =Book Review: The Church and the Tribulation |newspaper=Direction |pages=34–35 |date=April 1976 |url=http://www.directionjournal.org/article/?202}}</ref> who see this dual witness of Israel and the Church (in counterdistinction to premillenarian-pretribulationists who accuse these posttribulationists of “blurring” the traditional dispensational distinctions of Israel and the Church),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ldolphin.org/progdispen.html |title=A Proper Biblical D.I.E.T. |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=McCall |first=Tom |coauthors=Zola Levitt |year=2000 |month=February |work=Levitt Letter}}</ref> likewise adhere to the 3 ½ days of “their body” exposed to the “open persecution” ("their body lies in the street of the great city"; i.e., the 42 months aforementioned in Revelation 11:2) as the final three-and-one-half years of Prophecy of Seventy Weeks of Daniel's Prophecy and that the days mentioned here are years (i.e., the 70th Week represents seven years and 3 ½ days represents 1,260 days, 42 months, 3 ½ years, or time, times, and half a time)(See: 2300 Days or Day-year principle). <br />
<br />
Therefore, it is at the very close of the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy that the Two Witnesses are resurrected—there is no secret rapture (i.e., they are seen by all the inhabitants of the earth; Rev. 11:11)—a loud voice is heard from heaven calling all the “righteous dead” in the resurrection and those that are “alive and survive” the great tribulation are, as Paul proclaims: “The dead in Christ shall rise first, then we which are alive and ''remain'' (Grk. ''perileipo'' meaning ''survive'' - Strong's Greek: 4035).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/STRGRK40.htm|title=4035).}}</ref> shall be caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air” (I Thessalonians 4:16-17).<br />
<br />
Once again, it must be pointed out that Historicists see this 1,260-day period as 1,260 years and believe it is the time of the Papacy's<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.heraldmag.org/literature/proph_38.htm |title=The Man of Sin |accessdate=2007-12-31}}</ref> “rule and reign” as the antichrist system between A.D. 538 and 1798 (i.e., from the time the Roman Church was recognized as the “civil authority” until the time of [[Napoleon]]'s imprisoning of Pope Pius VI and his death in 1798).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Ott |first=Michael T. |year=1911 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref><br />
<br />
The subsequent passages in Revelation 11:13-19 are interpreted by Post-tribulationists as confirmation that the pouring out of the “wrath of God” (i.e., after the resurrection and rapture) is seen "in the same hour" (Revelation 11:13). Immediately, Messiah's descending from the heavens to establish His earthly kingdom and the famous sounds of Handel's Messiah, and of John's prophetic testimony, are heard:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The kingdoms of this world have now become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Messiah (Christ), and he shall reign forever and ever! (Rev. 11:15)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Revelation declares: “The Testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”<ref>Revelation 19:10.</ref> – therefore, as their deliverer testified on earth for 3 ½ years,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.carm.org/questions/Jesus_age.htm |title=How old was Jesus when He was crucified? |accessdate=2007-12-31 |year=2007 |work=Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry}}</ref> was crucified, arose from the dead, ascended to heaven – even so, this is the destiny of all those who will follow the Messiah--this is the "testimony of Jesus".<ref>Revelation 1:2.</ref> Furthermore, the extremity of believers who profess to have the "Testimony of Jesus" may be called to give the ultimate sacrifice in bearing witness to the One Who gave His all: "Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their '''witness''' to Jesus and for the word of God" (Rev. 20:4).<br />
<br />
===Church or concepts===<br />
<br />
Evangelical [[postmillennialism]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/pdf/Ice-WhatisPostmillennial.pdf |title=What Is Postmillenialism? Tom's Perspectives |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |format=PDF}}</ref> as well as St. Augustine's amillennialism,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://persweb.wabash.edu/facstaff/royaltyr/augustine.htm |title=Augustine and the Millennium |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Hutchinson |first=John M.}}</ref> accord future roles for the Two Witnesses in their commentaries; however, those roles are wholly symbolic of the Church's singular witness to the world. As Amillenarian Tony Warren declares:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
These two witnesses of Revelation eleven are a ‘symbol’ of God's faithful servants, the true eternal indivisible Church.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://members.aol.com/twarren17/rev11.html |title=A verse by verse exposition of Revelation Chapter 11 |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Warren |first=Tony |date=2002-10-14 |work=The Mountain Retreat}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Hence, the Church is the “Israel of God”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://members.aol.com/twarren13/israel2.html |title=The True Israel of God |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Shelton |first=L. R. |work=The Mountain Retreat}}</ref> – and the concluding witness of the Church, as originally propounded by Augustine,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/millenni.htm |title=Eschatology, End Times, and Millennialism: Competing Theories |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Robinson |first=B. A. |date=2006-08-18 |work=ReligiousTolerance.org |publisher=Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance}} </ref> will endure to the end of the age as a demonstration of “the age-long struggle of evil against Christ's rule.” Israel and the Church constitute one people of God—there is no literal seven-year tribulation on earth. Evangelical postmillennialism also sees Israel and the Church as the one people of God; however, the Millennium will be a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ, realized through the church's ministry of the kingdom of God.<br />
<br />
They who adhere to the singular witness of the Church until the [[Second Coming]] of Christ, affirm the Church's unique testimony until the [[Eschatology|eschaton]]. <br />
<br />
The 1599 Geneva Study Bible<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GenevaStudyBible/gen.cgi?book=re&chapter=011)|title=Bible}}</ref> asserts the two witnesses as the exclusive purvue of the church:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
1) The authority of the intended revelation being declared, together with the necessity of that calling which was particularly imposed on John after which follows the history of the estate of Christ his Church, both conflicting or warring, and overcoming in Christ. For the true Church of Christ is said to fight against that which is falsely so called, over which Antichrist rules, Christ Jesus overthrowing Antichrist by the spirit of his mouth: and Christ is said to overcome most gloriously until he shall slay Antichrist by the appearance of his coming, as the apostle teaches in (2 Thessalonians 2:8). So this history has two parts: One of the state of the Church conflicting with temptations until Chapter 16. The other of the state of the same church obtaining victory, thence to Chapter 20. The first part has two sections most conveniently distributed into their times, of which the first contains a history of the Christian Church for 1260 years, what time the gospel of Christ was as it were taken up from among men into heaven: the second contains a history of the same Church to the victory perfected. These two sections are briefly, though distinctly propounded in this chapter, but both of them are discoursed after in due order.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
This comment from the Geneva Study Bible is made on Revelation 11:4:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth . . .That is, the ordinary and perpetual instruments of spiritual grace, peace and light in my Church, which God by his only power preserved in this Temple. See (Zechariah 4:3).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
A somewhat collective expression of the Church as the singular witness is given in [[Matthew Henry]]'s Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/MatthewHenryComplete/mhc-com.cgi?book=re&chapter=011|title=Bible;}}</ref> Revelation 11:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
It is a sufficient number; for in the mouth of two witnesses every cause shall be established. Christ sent out his disciples two by two, to preach the gospel. Some think these two witnesses are Enoch and Elias, who are to return to the earth for a time: others, the church of the believing Jews and that of the Gentiles: it should rather seem that they are God's eminent faithful ministers, who shall not only continue to profess the Christian religion, but to preach it, in the worst of times. II. The time of their prophesying, or bearing their testimony for Christ. A thousand two hundred and threescore days; that is (as many think), to the period of the reign of antichrist; and, if the beginning of that interval could be ascertained, this number of prophetic days, taking a day for a year, would give us a prospect when the end shall be. III.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
[[John Wesley]] in his commentary on Revelation 11<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/WesleysExplanatoryNotes/wes.cgi?book=re&chapter=011|title=Revelation 11}}</ref> suggests a more "spiritual" application of their identity - almost ambiguous in nature:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
11:3 And I - Christ - will give to my two witnesses - These seem to be two prophets; two select, eminent instruments. Some have supposed (though without foundation) that they are Moses and Elijah, whom they resemble in several respects. To prophesy twelve hundred and sixty days - Common days, that is, an hundred and eighty weeks. So long will they prophesy, (even while that last and sharp treading of the holy city continues,) both by word and deed, witnessing that Jesus is the Son of God, the heir of all things, and exhorting all men to repent, and fear, and glorify God. Clothed in sackcloth - The habit of the deepest mourners, out of sorrow and concern for the people. 11:4 These are the two olive trees - That is, as Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two olive trees spoken of by Zechariah, Zechariah 3:9, 4:10, were then the two chosen instruments in God's hand, even so shall these. be in their season. Being themselves full of the unction of the Holy One, they shall continually transmit the same to others also. And the two candlesticks - Burning and shining lights. Standing before the Lord of the earth - Always waiting on God, without the help of man, and asserting his right over the earth and all things therein.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
John Gill's ''Exposition of the Bible''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/gil.cgi?book=re&chapter=011&verse=003&next=004&prev=002|title=Bible}}</ref> presents a classical Protestant Historicist interpretation of the two witnesses as the true Church in counter distinction to the ''antichrist'' system of Roman Catholicism:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Though they ought not to be considered exclusive of other ministers and churches, who also have bore, and still do bear a witness for Christ, and against the idolatries of the church of Rome: no two individual persons can be meant, since these witnesses were to prophesy 1260 days, that is, so many years, but a succession of ministers and churches.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Ross Taylor's "Verse by Verse Commentary on Revelation"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.apocalipsis.org/rev-11.htm|title=Revelation"}}</ref> clearly defines the Church as the "two olive trees and the two lampstands" . . .<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The two witnesses represent the witnessing church rather than two individuals: 1. The church received power to witness at Pentecost, see verse 3 'I will give power to my two witnesses and they will prophecy...' cf. Acts 1:8 and 2:18. 2. Two is the number to establish a witness, testimony (Deu 17:6, John 8:17, 2 Cor 13:1), for example our Lord sent his disciple out in twos, Mark 6:7. 3. They are described as 'the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth' 11:4. We have already seen that the church is symbolised by lampstands in 1:20. The olive trees represent the power of the Holy Spirit with which the witnesses had received (Acts 1:5, 1:8, 2:17). 4. They prophecy for the same period (1,260 days) as the worshippers, temple of God and holy city is trampled on by the Gentiles (42 months). These three designations are all indicative of the church. 5. They rise from the dead and are raptured as is the church (11:11-12). 6. 11:7 indicates that '...the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them' i.e. the two witnesses this parallels the warning in 13:7 that the beast 'was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them' see also the warning in 13:10. If the two events are indeed parallel then the two witnesses are the saints.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Furthermore, the elimination of all or part of the 70th Week of Daniel (yet future) is the hallmark of Historicist eschatology—there is no personal Antichrist, peace treaty to be signed with Israel, a future rebuilt Jewish temple, or future 70th week.{{Fact|date=July 2008}}<br />
<br />
===An Amillennial Exposition of Revelation 11:1-13===<br />
<br />
An Amillennial exposition of Revelation 11:1-13 is available at this link.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/files/show_article.php?id=153 |title=Nollie Malabuyo, "The Two Faithful Witnesses" |date=[[2005]]-[[03-22]] |work=TwoAgesPilgrims.com}}</ref> You can also read an exegesis of the passage in [http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/files/show_article.php?id=157/ "Will Moses and Elijah Come Back? The Two Witnesses of Revelation 11:1-13"]<br />
<br />
===Individuals===<br />
<br />
The identity and worldwide notoriety of the Two Witnesses as singular individuals is held by numerous Biblical literalists – a few of their quotations will confirm their commentary . . .<br />
<br />
Dr. Thomas L. Constable of Dallas Theological Seminary on his studies of Revelation (''Notes on Revelation'', 2007 Edition) provides a dispensationalist interpretation of the two witnesses as two "new individuals" to arrive on the prophetic scene yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Even though believing Jews will suffer persecution at this time, God will still get His message out. Two witnesses will be especially significant at this time. Valid testimony required two witnesses under the Old Covenant (Deut. 19:15), and both Jesus and the early church sent out emissaries in pairs (Mark 6:7; Luke 10:2; Acts 13:2; 15:39-40). Revelation 11:3 Who is speaking in this verse? The speaker seems to be the angel who spoke in verses 1-2, who here speaks for God (cf. v. 8). God did not reveal the identity of the two witnesses. Many commentators believe they will be Moses and Elijah since these men were prophets and performed the kinds of miracles these witnesses will perform (v. 6). Others believe they will be Enoch and Elijah since God took these men to heaven without dying. Another reason some believe one of these witnesses will be Elijah is Malachi 4:5, which predicts that Elijah will return before Messiah. Other less literal interpreters think the two witnesses may represent not two individuals but the faithful witness of the church throughout its persecutions. I agree with those who believe that they will be individuals living at this time rather than former prophets brought back to earth for this ministry (cf. Matt. 11:14).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://soniclight.com/constable/notes/pdf/revelation.pdf |title=Notes on<br />
Revelation: 2007 Edition |accessdate=2007-08-28 |last=Constable |first=Thomas L. |year=2007 |format=PDF |publisher=Sonic Light |pages=98 }}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
J. Dwight Pentecost's ''Things to Come'' (also of dispensationalist - Dallas Theological Seminary) concludes:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
It would seem best to conclude that the identity of these men is uncertain. They, in all probability, are not men who lived before and have been restored, but are two men raised up as a special witness, to whom sign-working power is given. their ministry is one of judgment, as their sackcloth clothing indicates.<ref>{{cite book |last=Pentecost |first=J. Dwight |title=Things to Come |year=1962 |publisher=Dunham Publishing Company |location=Findlay, Ohio |page=308}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Paul D. Feinberg<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.foutz.net/archives/people/paul_d_feinberg_phd_in_memorium_february_21_2004.shtml|title=Paul D. Feinberg)}}</ref> in ''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.amazon.com/Three-Views-Rapture-Pre-Post-Tribulation/dp/0310212952|title=''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation''}}</ref> defends the Pre-Tribulational Rapture position and interprets the two witnesses as follows:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
"The two witnesses appear to be individuals rather than representatives of all living and dead saints. The witnesses perform miracles; they testify. These actions are usually done by individuals, not groups. Moreover, both witnesses are killed by the Beast. If they are symbolic of all saints, then it seems as if all saints will be martyred before the Rapture. Further, it also appears that all saints will have men gaze at their dead bodies and desecrate them." (''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation'', Stanley N. Gundry, Gleason L. Archer Jr., Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1996, p. 148)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Those adhering to the "individual theory" of the two witnesses point out that these are truly awesome figures. They are similar to [[Moses]] and [[Aaron]] or [[Elijah]] and [[Elisha]] - both sets wrought indisputable havoc upon their audiences (Egypt and [[Apostasy|Apostate]] Israel) and "nothing could harm them." Therefore, could not individuals be raised up in the "end of days" and do such world-wide miracles? Could they not prevail as Moses and Elijah did before the masses? Furthermore, "their dead body" (singular) does not signify any "corporate nature" of their identity--to the contrary, it simply means the visibility of a dead body in the street of Jerusalem for 3 1/2 days (not years). Their resurrection is peculiar to them only--and does not connote the ''Resurrection of the just'' nor the rapture, for the rapture of the Church (according to pretribulationists) takes place at the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
<br />
The "great city" mentioned in Revelation 11 is not the great city found elsewhere in the Revelation<ref>{{cite web |url=http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Bible.show/sVerseID/30881/eVerseID/30881 |title=Forerunner Commentary |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=Ritenbaugh |first=John W. |year=2008 |work=BibleTools |publisher=Church of the Great God}}</ref>; and the "holy city" trampled under foot is physical Jerusalem,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn32/jerusalem.htm |title=Jerusalem: Focus of Biblical Prophecy |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=McNeely |first=Darris |year=2001 |month=January/February |work=The Good News |publisher=United Church of God}}</ref> not the two witnesses. Likewise, the "temple" which is measured is the physical rebuilt temple<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/featured/price/7rp.html |title=An Overview of the Future Temples |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=Price |first=Randall |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> in Jerusalem, not the two witnesses.<br />
<br />
The late Dr. John Walvoord, president of Dallas Theological Seminary, in his ''Every Prophecy of the Bible''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/walvoord.html|title=''Every Prophecy of the Bible''}}</ref> repeats the classical dispensational, pre-tribulational, literalist interpretation of the two witnesses . . . excerpts from his text:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In the Great Tribulation the temple has already been desecrated, sacrifices stopped, and the worship of the world ruler installed instead (Dan. 9:27; 12:11-12; Matt. 24:15; 2 Thes. 2:4; Rev. 13:14-15). Measuring the temple will indicate the apostasy of the nation of Israel and their need for revival and restoration. The Holy City, Jerusalem, according to the Scripture, will be trampled underfoot of Gentiles for the final forty-two months preceding the Second Coming. This has actually been true ever since 600 B.C. because from then to the time of the Great Tribulation, Israel never was in full possession of their holy places except by Gentile tolerance and permission. This is still true today as Israel could not retain its independence without the help of the United States. The forty-two months, however, refer to the Great Tribulation as a time when the holy place in the temple will be desecrated especially, and the Great Tribulation will run its course, climaxing in the second coming of Christ (13:5). Though there have been brief periods in the history of Israel when Israel temporarily retained control of the holy place, it will never be permanently theirs until the second coming of Christ. John was then introduced to those who were called 'two witnesses' who will be prophets in the end time. Their prophecy will cover 1,260 days, or forty-two months, the same length of time that the world ruler will possess the temple and turn it into a religious center for the worship of himself . . . the reference to the two witnesses as being symbolized by the two olive trees and the two lampstands probably has reference to Zechariah 4 where the lampstand and two trees are discussed. The meaning of this to Zerubbabel, who was one of the important leaders in Israel in Zechariah's time, was that their witness was empowered by the oil from the olive tree, symbolic of being empowered by the Holy Spirit (Zech. 4:1-14). In view of the fact that the Bible does not indicate who they are, it is probably safe to recognize them as two witnesses who will appear in the end time who are not related to any previous historical character.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Some claim that the two are "Jewish evangelists" who "evangelize Israel" while the 144000 of Revelation 7 "evangelize the rest of the world" during the 70th Week of Daniel.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Who are they? We're not told, so we can't be certain, yet we know that . . . - ''Witness'' in Greek is ''martus'' (''martyr''). In Rev. 12:11 OT Israeli allusions are used, not NT Church figures like Peter or Paul. These two evangelize Israel; while the 144,000 evangelize the rest of the world! They possibly represent the OT Law and Prophets (Matt 22:36-40). Possibly Elijah (Representing the Prophets). Possibly Moses (Representing the Law).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.soulcare.org/Bible%20Studies/Revelation/Revelation11_Witnesses.htm |title=Revelation 11 Consequences of Christ: The Two Witnesses Mercy-Grace |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Galloway |first=Sid |date=2001-03-18 |work=The Bible: One Bite at a Time}}</ref></blockquote><br />
<br />
The [[Eastern Orthodox Church]] teaches that the Two Witnesses will be [[Enoch]] and Elias (the two individuals who entered bodily into heaven), who will be sent back to earth to preach during the Great Tribulation, and they will be the last [[martyr]]s before the [[Second Coming]]. <br />
<br />
Biblical literalists have incorporated the developments in electronic communications systems with the interpretations of the scripture: "And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves" (Revelation 11:9). During the close of the nineteenth century, Ethelbert William Bullinger indicated electronics inventiveness would facilitate the literal fulfillment of this prophecy through the following statement and its footnote:<ref>Bullinger, E. W. (1984). ''Commentary on Revelation'' [[p. 365]]. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications. ISBN 0-8254-2289-2. According to the [[printers key]], the second printing of this work was in 1889.</ref><br />
<br />
:The older commentators might have felt a difficulty in understanding how the whole earth could rejoice at an event happening at Jerusalem. But in these days of electric inventions, telephones, and wireless telegraphy, we all know how the next day the whole world sympathises and rejoices together.<br />
::Witness the death of Queen Victoria; the murder of President M’Kinley; or the American Yacht Race – all the stages of the latter were known the world over within a few minutes of the passing events.<br />
<br />
During the 1930s, when [[television]] became commercially available, Knoch stated that invention merely needed to be developed further for the literal fulfillment of the above scripture.<ref>Knoch, A. E. (1935). ''The Unveiling of Jesus Christ'' [p. 319]. Saugus, CA: Concordant Publishing Concern.</ref> Two years after the launch of [[Sputnik]], Bloomfield said the events of Revelation 11:9 would be covered by “some kind of television.”<ref> Bloomfield, A. E. (2002). ''The Key to Understanding Revelation'' [p.200]. Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers. ISBN 0-7642-2593-6. Originally published 1959</ref> In 1962, the first satellite to relay a television signal from Europe to North America was Telstar. [[Hal Lindsey]] referred to that specific communication system in his explanation.<ref>Lindsey, H. (1977). ''There’s A New World Coming'' [p. 151]. New York, NY: Bantam Books, Incorporated. ISBN 0-553-10832-8. Originally published by Vision House Publishers in 1973.</ref> By 1999, John F. Walvoord,<ref>Walvoord, J. F. (1999). ''Every Prophecy of the Bible'' [p. 574]. Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing. ISBN 1-56476-758-2. Formerly titled ''The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook'' (1990).</ref> Tim LaHaye,<ref>LaHaye, T. F. (1999). ''Revelation Unveiled'' [p. 188]. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. ISBN 0-310-23005-5.</ref> and Grant Jeffrey,<ref>Jeffrey, G. R. (1999). ''The Signature of God The Handwriting of God'' [p. 194]. New York, NY: Inspirational Press. ISBN 0-88486-255-0.</ref> leading proponents of the literalist view and authors of best sellers, had explained Revelation 11:9 in terms of literal fulfillments through some form of worldwide satellite television system.<br />
<br />
Finally, perhaps they are archangels.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/snotes/note1204.html |title=The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Loughran |first=David B |year=1999 |work=Sermon Notes |publisher=Stewarton Bible School}}</ref><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
<br />
*[[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
*[[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
*[[Antichrist]]<br />
*[[Apocalypse]]<br />
*[[Armageddon]]<br />
*[[Book of Daniel]]<br />
*[[Book of Revelation]]<br />
*[[Eschatology]]<br />
*[[End times]]<br />
*[[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
*[[Last Judgment]]<br />
*[[Millenarianism]]<br />
*[[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
*[[Preterism]]<br />
*[[Postmillennialism]]<br />
*[[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
*[[Third Temple]]<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
*Historicism(Christian eschatology) - Historicism is an eschatological system of prophetic interpretation derived from the Protestant Reformation and holds that the prophecies of the Bible have taken place throughout history (many have been fulfilled) - some still will be fulfilled.<br />
*Futurism (Christian eschatology) - Biblical Futurism asserts that most of the relevant prophetic themes of Christian and Hebrew Scripture are yet future - the "end times" prophecies are mainly found outside the immediate time frame but could unravel any time - most hold to a literal, physical, apocalyptic and global view of Bible prophecies.<br />
*[[Preterism]] - A variant of Christian eschatology which holds that some or all of the biblical prophecies concerning the Last Days (or End Times) refer to events which actually happened in the first century after Christ's birth.<br />
*Partial Preterism - A form of Christian eschatology that holds much in common with but is distinct from Full preterism (or 'consistent' or 'hyper' preterism) in that it places the events of most of the Book of Revelation as occurring during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD (and/or the Fall of Rome several centuries later) yet still affirms an orthodox future bodily return of Christ to earth at an unknown day and hour.<br />
*Idealism (Christian eschatology) - Idealism (also called the 'Spiritual view') in Christian eschatology is an interpretation of the Book of Revelation that sees all of the imagery of the book as non-literal symbols which are perpetually and cyclically fulfilled in a spiritual sense during the conflict between the Kingdom of God and the forces of Satan throughout the time from the first advent to the Second Coming of Christ.<br />
*Millennialism - Millennialism (or chiliasm), from millennium, which literally means "thousand years", is primarily a belief expressed in some Christian denominations, and literature, that there will be a Golden Age or Paradise on Earth where "Christ will reign" prior to the final judgment and future eternal state, primarily derived from the book of Revelation 20:1-6. Millennialism as such is a specific form of Millenarianism.<br />
*[[Postmillennialism]] - In Christian eschatology, postmillennialism is an interpretation of chapter 20 of the Book of Revelation which sees Christ's second coming as occurring after or post- the thousand year "millennium".<br />
*[[Premillennialism]] - Christian eschatology which holds the belief that Christ will literally reign on the earth for 1,000 years at his second coming. The doctrine is called premillennialism because it views the current age as prior to Christ's kingdom. It is distinct from other forms of eschatology such as amillennialism, postmillennialism, and preterism which view the kingdom as figurative and non-temporal, or as currently occurring in history before Christ's coming. Premillennialism is largely based upon a literal interpretation of Revelation 20:1-6 in the New Testament which describes Christ's coming to the earth and subsequent reign at the end of an apocalyptic period of tribulation. It views this future age as a time of fulfillment for the prophetic hope of God's people as given in the Old Testament.<br />
*Amillennialism -Amillennialism (from the Latin prefix meaning "no", ''mille'', meaning "thousand", and ''annum'' meaning "year") is a view in Christian eschatology named for its denial of a future, thousand-year, physical reign of Jesus Christ on the earth, as espoused in the premillennial and some postmillennial views of the Book of Revelation, chapter 20.<br />
*[[Tribulation|The Tribulation]] - The Tribulation (or "Great Tribulation") is an event referred to in the New Testament of the Bible at Matthew 24:21 ("For then shall be great tribulation..." - King James Version) and other passages. In the futurist view of Christian eschatology, the Tribulation is a relatively short period of time where believers will experience worldwide persecution and be purified and strengthened by it.<br />
*[[Rapture]] - The rapture (''harpazo'' in Greek in 1 Thessalonians 4:17) is the common description of the event in Christian eschatology in which Christians will be "taken" or "caught up" from Earth to Heaven to be with Jesus Christ.<br />
*Post Tribulation Rapture - This doctrine holds that there is a Resurrection-Rapture of living believers in Jesus Christ at the end of the age (or the "End times"). Posttribulationists believe that Christians will not be taken up into Heaven at the rapture, but will gathered by the angels to meet Christ in the air, then return with him to enter the millennium on earth.<br />
*Prewrath Rapture - The Prewrath View (also known as Mid Tribulation Raptureplaces the rapture of the Church after the mid-point of a yet future 70th Week of Daniel--i.e., after the "abomination of desolation" - also holds that a side-by-side comparison of the wording of the sixth seal (Revelation 6:12-13) and the signs in Matthew 24:29 that announce the Second Coming of Jesus and the rapture of the Church indicate that they are the same event. Therefore, the rapture described in Matthew 24:29-31 can be placed after the sixth seal of Revelation.<br />
*Thomas Ice and the Pre Tribulation Rapture - A Dispensational-Premillennarian eschatology which affirms that the believing Church will be raptured prior to the 70th Week of Daniel (i.e., before the "tribulation" or the final seven-years of this age); likewise, this eschatology sees the coming Antichrist as a real person energized by Satan who will implement a "defense pact" or "peace treaty" with Israel at the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week. Thomas Ice of the Pre-trib Research Center is an avowed proponent of this eschatology.<br />
*Dispensationalism - In Christian theology, Dispensationalism teaches biblical history as a number of successive economies or administrations, called dispensations, each of which emphasizes the continuity of the Old Testament covenants God made with His chosen people through Abraham, Moses and King David.<br />
*Hyperdispensationalism - Hyperdispensationalism (or sometimes ultra-dispensationalism), as opposed to traditional (or mainstream) Dispensationalism, views the start of the Christian church as beginning with the ministry of the Apostle Paul after the early part of the book of Acts. Hyperdispensationalists regard the failure of the post-Apostolic church to preserve the Pauline Distinctive as a cause of the Great Apostasy and as a mistake of the 19th Century Restoration Movement. Hyperdispensationalists regard what they understand to be the recovery of true Pauline Christianity as the crowning achievement of events that began with the Protestant Reformation.<br />
*Progressive Dispensationalism - Progressive Dispensationalism is one of two views in mainstream dispensationalism, the other being the traditional view. The major difference between the traditional and progressive dispensationalist views concerns the relationship between the dispensations. Traditional dispensationalists perceive the present age of grace as an "intercalation" or parenthesis in God's plan, and therefore is unrelated to the past and future dispensations. However, progressive dispensationalists reject this idea of a parenthesis, and perceive the present age of grace as a key link or progression in relation with the past and future dispensations.<br />
*[[Eschatology]] - Eschatology (from the Greek ἔσχατος, ''eschatos'' meaning "last" + ology) is a part of theology and philosophy concerned with the final events in the history of the world or the ultimate destiny of mankind, commonly phrased as the end of the world. In many religions, the end of the world is a future event prophesied in sacred texts or folklore. More broadly, eschatology may encompass related concepts such as the Messiah or Messianic Age, the afterlife, and the soul.<br />
*Roman Catholic Eschatology - The Roman Catholic Church affirms the Amillennialism or Amillennarian worldview. Amillennialism was taught by St. Augustine in the fourth century and was a widely held view among Christians throughout Church history. Origen's idealizing tendency to consider only the spiritual as real (which was fundamental to his entire system) led him to combat the "rude" or "crude" aspects of a literal 1,000-year Messianic Kingdom yet future. Amillennialism has been widely held in the Eastern Orthodox Church as well, which generally follows Augustine on this point and which has deemed that Premillennialism cannot be safety taught. Amillennialism is also often associated with Protestants such as those in the Lutheran, Reformed and Anglican churches. (Please see Amillennialism).<br />
*Seventh-Day Adventist Eschatology - The Seventh-day Adventist church holds a unique system of eschatological (or end-times) beliefs. Adventist eschatology is characterized principally by the premillennial second coming of Jesus Christ. Seventh-day Adventism derives its eschatological teachings in large part from its interpretation of the books of Daniel and Revelation, as well as the teachings of Jesus Christ found in Matthew chapter 24. Adventists have traditionally interpreted biblical prophecies using the historicist method, although some of the prophecies of Revelation are thought have a future application. It is this futurist aspect of the church's interpretation of the book of Revelation that has played a major part in shaping Adventist eschatology.<br />
*Mormon Eschatology - In Mormonism, all Latter Day Saints are viewed as covenant, or chosen, people; they have accepted the name of Jesus Christ. Latter Day Saints do not dispute the "chosen" status of the Jewish people. In LDS doctrine all people who have ever lived will have the ability to enter into this covenant during the Millennium (yet future). Mormon eschatology holds that Jews, as a chosen people, will ultimately accept Christianity (See Jeremiah 31:31-34). Mormon doctrine teaches that Mormons are "The kin blood of the Jews." Every practicing LDS member receives a patriarchal blessing that reveals their linage in the House of Israel. This lineage may be blood related or through "adoption;" therefore, a child may not necessarily share the lineage of her parents (but will still be a member of the tribes of Israel). It is a widely held belief that most members of the faith are in the tribe of Ephraim or the tribe of Manasseh.<br />
*Jehovah's Witnesses Eschatology - The eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses is central to their religious beliefs. They believe that Jesus Christ has been ruling as king since 1914, and that after that time a short period of cleansing has begun taking place. They further believe that from 1919, Jehovah's Witnesses were selected by God to be his people. Jehovah's Witnesses believe 1918 to be the time when Christ Jesus judged all world religions. They teach that after a period of 18 months, among all groups and religions, there was found only one that was humbly doing the will of Christ. Jehovah's Witnesses claim the "Bible Students" who later became known as "Jehovah's Witnesses" in 1931 (See History of Jehovah's Witnesses) are that one unique group.<br />
*British Israelism Eschatology - Teaches that the Anglo-Saxon race are the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel; therefore, many of the prophecies pointing toward "Jewish fulfillment" are really fulfilled in the Lost Tribes. It holds, however, many of the eschatological affirmations of the Seventh-Day Adventists.<br />
*Supersessionism - Supersessionism (sometimes referred to as replacement theology by its critics) is a belief that Christianity is the fulfillment and continuation of the Old Testament, and that Jews who deny that Jesus is the Messiah are not being faithful to the revelation that God has given them, and they therefore fall short of their calling as his chosen people. This view holds that racial and ethnic divisions and boundaries are ended in Jesus Christ, and faith in Jesus unites all peoples into one new body, which is God's chosen people.<br />
*[[Messianic Judaism]] - Messianic Judaism is a religion centered on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, who is referred to as Yeshua by its adherents.<br />
*[[Apologetics]] - The field of study concerned with the systematic defense of a position.<br />
*[[Exegesis]] - The extensive and critical interpretation of a text, especially of a holy scripture<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
<br />
===Relevant Biblical texts===<br />
*[[Book of Revelation|Revelation 10, 11, 12, 13, 16-21]]<br />
*[[Genesis|Genesis 37, 39-50]]<br />
*[[Book of Daniel|Daniel 7-12]]<br />
*{{bibleverse||Zechariah|3-7|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Zechariah|10-14|NKJV}}<br />
*[[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew 24]]<br />
*[[Gospel of Luke|Luke 17:20-37; 21]]<br />
*[[Epistle to the Romans|Romans 9-11]]<br />
*{{bibleverse|I|Corinthians|15:50-58|NKJV}}<br />
*{{bibleverse|I|Thessalonians|4:13-5:15|NKJV}}<br />
*{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:1-12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
===Suggested book list===<br />
*Alnor, William M., ''Soothsayers of the Second Advent.'' Fleming H. Revell, 1989. ISBN 0-8007-5324-0<br />
*Barnhouse, Donald Grey, ''Revelation - An Expositional Commentary.'' Zondervan, 1971. ISBN 0-310-20491-7<br />
*Boston, Robert, ''Close Encounters with the Religious Right.'' Prometheus Books, 2000. ISBN 1-57392-797-X<br />
*Brog, David, ''Standing With Israel.'' Front Line, A Strang Company, 2006. ISBN 1-59185-906-9<br />
*Clarkson, Frederick, ''Eternal Hostility.'' Common Courage Press, 1997. ISBN 1-56751-088-4<br />
*Coombes, R. A., ''America, The Babylon - America's Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy'' A Real Book, 1998. ISBN 1-890622-33-8<br />
*Culver, Robert Duncan, ''Daniel and the Latter Days''. Fleming H. Revell Company, 1954. {{LCCN|54|00|5434}}<br />
*Dyer, Charles H., ''The Rise of Babylon.'' Moody Publishers, 2003. ISBN 0-8024-0905-9<br />
*Feinberg, Charles L., ''Millennialism - Two Major Views''. Moody Press, 1980. ISBN 0-8024-6815-2<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''The Church and the Tribulation.'' Zondervan, 1973. ISBN 0-310-25401-9<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''First the Antichrist.'' Baker Books, May 1997. ISBN 0-8010-5764-7<br />
*Gundry, Stanley N.; Archer, Gleason L., Jr., ''Three Views on The Rapture - Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulation.'' Zondervan, 1996. ISBN 0-310-21298-7<br />
*Hitchcock, Mark, ''Is America in Bible Prophecy?.'' Multnomah Publishers, 2002. ISBN 1-57673496-X<br />
*Hunt, Dave, ''A Cup of Trembling - Jerusalem and Bible Prophecy.'' Harvest House Publishers, 1995. ISBN 1-56507-334-7<br />
*Ironside, Harry A., ''Revelation.'' Loizeaux Brothers, 1982. ISBN 0-87213-384-2<br />
*Jeffrey, Grant R., ''Armageddon - Appointment with Destiny.'' Bantam Books, 1990. ISBN 0-553-28537-8<br />
*Juster, Dan; Intrater, Keith, ''Israel, the Church and the Last Days.'' Destiny Image Publishers, 1991. ISBN 1-56043-061-3<br />
*Krieger, Doug, ''Unsealing the End of Days: The Visions and Prophecy of Zechariah.''<ref>{{cite web |url=http://http://www.the-tribulation network.com/dougkrieger/unsealing/unsealing_by_chapter.htm|title=Unsealing the End of Days: The Visions and Prophecy of Zechariah}}</ref> (date, 2004-08-30)<br />
*Ladd, George Eldon, ''"A Commentary on the Revelation of John".'' William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972. ISBN 0-8028-1684-3<br />
*Ladd, George Eldon, ''"The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of The Second Advent and the Rapture."'' Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1956. ISBN 0-8028-1111-6<br />
*Lalonde, Peter & Patti, ''"Left Behind".'' Harvest House Publishers, 1995. ISBN 0-9636407-3-9<br />
*LaSor, William Sanford, ''"The Truth About Armageddon".'' Harper & Row, 1982. ISBN 0-06-064919-4<br />
*Lindsey, Hal, ''"Planet Earth - 2000 A.D."'' Western Front, Ltd., 1994. ISBN 0-9641058-0-2<br />
*Linker, Damon, ''"The Theocons".'' Doubleday, 2006. ISBN 978-0-385-51647-1<br />
*Paterson, Stella, ''"Calling Forth The Remnant By Way of the Cross".'' Preparing The Way Publishers, 2006. ISBN 1-929451-21-0<br />
*Pentecost, J. Dwight, ''"Things To Come".'' Dunham Publishing Company, 1962.<br />
*Perry, Richard H., ''"Of the Last Days: Listen, I Tell You a Mystery".'' Essence Publishing (Canada), July 2003. ISBN 1-55306-595-6<br />
*Pink, Arthur W., ''"The Antichrist".'' Kregel Publications, 1988. ISBN0-8254-3539-0<br />
*Rausch, David A., ''"Zionism Within Early American Fundamentalism 1878-1918 - A Convergence of Two Traditions".'' The Edwin Mellen Press, 1979. ISBN 0-88946-875-3<br />
*Ryrie, Charles Caldwell, ''"Dispensationalism Today".'' Moody Press, 1965. ISBN 0-8024-2256-X<br />
*Shearer, S. R. (Steve), ''"The Beginning of the End".'' End of the Age Ministries, 1985. {{LCCN|85|00|81941}}<br />
*Spargimino, Larry, ''"The Anti-Prophets - The Challenge of Preterism".'' Hearthstone Publishing, 2000. ISBN 1-57558-080-2<br />
*Sutton, William Josiah, ''"Ancient Prophecies About the Dragon, The Beast, and the False Prophet".'' The Institute of Religious Knowledge, 1999. ISBN 0-917013-02-6<br />
*Sutton, William Josiah, ''"The Antichrist 666".'' Teach Services, Inc., 1995. ISBN 1-57258-015-1<br />
*Walvoord, John F., ''"Every Prophecy of the Bible".'' Chariot Victory Publishing, 1999. ISBN 0-7394-0215-3<br />
*Walvoord, John F., ''"The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook". '' Victor Books, 1977. ISBN 0-89693-509-4<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''"The Church and the Tribulation".'' Zondervan, 1973. ISBN 0-310-25401-9<br />
*Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania - "''Revelation - Its Grand Climax At Hand!".'' Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., 1988.<br />
*White, E. G., ''"America in Prophecy".'' Inspiration Books East, Inc., 1888. ISBN 0-916547-04-3<br />
*Woodrow, Ralph, ''"His Truth is Marching On -Advanced Studies on Prophecy in the Light of History".'' Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Assn., Inc., 1996 Edition. ISBN 0-916938-03-04<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Two_Witnesses&diff=645775Two Witnesses2009-03-28T23:26:17Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* See also */</p>
<hr />
<div>In Christian eschatology, the '''Two Witnesses''' are two individuals, concepts or "corporate beings" described in chapter 11 of the [[Book of Revelation]] in the events leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.<br />
{{cquote|<br />
"'And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth.' These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth. And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner. these have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy; and they have power over waters to turn them to blood, and to strike the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire. When they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them. And their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three-and-a-half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into the graves. And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth. Now after three-and-a-half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, 'Come up here.' And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them. In the same hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. In the earthquake seven thousand people were killed, and the rest were afraid and gave glory to the God of heaven." (Revelation 11:3-13 - New King James Version)}}<br />
<br />
==Identity==<br />
<br />
Growing interest in the identity of the two witnesses of Revelation 11 and the timing of their appearance, has inspired Eschatological debate for centuries.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wcg.org/lit/bible/Rev/2witnesses.htm |title=The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Kroll |first=Paul |year=1999 |publisher=Worldwide Church of God}}</ref> Are they two literal individuals or are they symbolic of a concept (e.g., the Old and New Testaments of the Bible<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tagnet.org/cyberspace/Lessons/Fut-057/fut1-057.html|title=If I Were Told the Future -- Lesson 57: The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |year=2002 |work=Cyberspace Ministry}}</ref>) or corporate entities which symbolize peoples? Are they here now<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/herenow.htm |title=Are The Two Witnesses Here Now? |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Blank |first=Wayne |work=Daily Bible Study |publisher=The Church of God}}</ref> if they are personified - or are they yet future, as millenarian [[Hal Lindsey]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:lQb5fAcu260J:www.raptureready.com/featured/HalLindsey.html+Hal+Lindsey+The+Two+Witnesses&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5|title=Hal Lindsey}}</ref> claims they are - ready to appear on the [[Apocalypse|apocalyptic]] scene, along with the [[Antichrist]]? Perhaps they represent the witnessing Church<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.apocalipsis.org/downloads/revelatn.pdf |title=Revelation: A Reference Commentary |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Taylor |first=R A |date=[[2000]]-[[03-17]] |format=PDF |pages=111-112}} </ref> since Jesus sent out his disciples "two by two".<ref>Mark 6:7.</ref> On the other hand, could they be some form of reincarnation<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.elevated.fsnet.co.uk/index-page14.html |title=Reincarnation and Christianity |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Millett |first=Michael G |work=Elevated Therapy International}}</ref> of Moses and Elijah<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=77&cuItem_itemID=14532|title=WELS Topical Q&A: Endtime/Prophecies Two Witnesses|accessdate=2007-06-26 |year=2007 |work=Communication Services |publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod}}</ref> because both of them were prophets; Moses<ref>Exodus 7:16-18.</ref> struck the waters of the Nile and they turned into blood; and Elijah<ref>1 Kings 17:1-7.</ref> commanded the heavens that it rained not and did so for three-and-one-half years.<ref>James 5:17.</ref> Indeed, the other witness may be Enoch<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.apocalypsesoon.org/xfile-11.html |title=Eight Good Reasons Why Enoch Must Be One of the Two Witnesses! |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Wunderlich |first=Bob |work=Apocalypse Soon: The Xcellent Files}}</ref> (i.e., Elijah and Enoch), because he, like Elijah "was taken"<ref>Hebrews 11:5.</ref> (i.e., did not suffer physical death). They could simply be two Jewish prophets (as the ''[[Left Behind]] Series'' claims<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.leftbehind.com/channelfree.asp?pageid=1284&channelID=175 |title=Who Are the Two Witnesses? |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=LaHaye |first=Tim, et al. |year=2004 |work=The Authorized Left Behind Handbook}}</ref>) who in the period of the 70th Week of Daniel (yet future or partial<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/m.sion/70wedan9.htm|title=Daniel 9:24-27|accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Amy |first=Stephen |work=Worship at the Altar}}</ref> come in the power of Moses and Elijah and are representative of the law (Moses) and the prophets (Elijah)).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://biblia.com/bible/rev11.htm |title=The Temple... and the Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-06-26 |last=Dominguez |first=J}}</ref> Indeed, some claim that the notion of a yet future 70th Week of Daniel is a Catholic (Jesuit) conspiracy<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.godssabbathtruth.com/sabbath-antichrist.html |title=The Great Catholic Diversion Revealed |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=2006 |work=Sabbath & Antichrist Truth Revealed |publisher=GodsSabbathTruth.com}}</ref> to take the heat off the papacy as the "seat of the antichrist system"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?2617&collectionID=795&contentID=4441&shortcutID=5297|title=Statement on the Antichrist |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=2007 |work=CICR: WELS Doctrinal Statements |publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod}}</ref> and to place the onus on a yet future and literal person who will be the incarnation of Satan himself<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thepropheticyears.com/The%20book%20of%20Revelation/Revelation%20Chapter%2017.htm |title=Revelation chapter 17 commentary |accessdate=2007-06-27 |last=Koenig |first=Don |year=2004 |work=The Revelation of Jesus Christ Through the Ages}}</ref> - who, as the beast will "make war against them, overcome them, and kill them"<ref>Revelation 11:7.</ref> -- hence, this prophecy of a future personification of "The Antichrist" is erroneous and has already been fulfilled<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/m.sion/da70fufu.htm |title=Daniel's 70th Week--Future or Fulfilled? |accessdate=2007-06-27 |publisher=Used by permission from Ralph Woodrow}}</ref> in history. To be certain - Roman Catholic eschatology affirms the coming of the Antichrist.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm |title=Antichrist |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=1907 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref><br />
<br />
Their description as "two olive trees and two lampstands"<ref>Revelation 11:4.</ref> is taken as symbolism and/or allegorical. This [[Hermeneutics|hermeneutical]] approach to the Bible is adjudged by some as "hyper-allegorical"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07303b.htm |title=Hesychius of Jerusalem |accessdate=2007-06-27 |year=1907 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> juxtaposed to a more "[[Biblical literalism|literal"]] interpretation; however, those who adhere to a Christian fundamentalist reading of the Bible (i.e., [[Biblical inerrancy|inerrancy]]) do not find common ground on the exposition of the identity of these Two Witnesses. Through commentary and exposition<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.preceptaustin.org/tool_commentary.htm |title=Bible Commentaries |accessdate=2007-06-27 |date=[[2007]]-[[06-07]] |publisher=Precept Austin}}</ref> the Two Witnesses could be considered as both symbolic and as literal (i.e., representative of peoples). Controversy over the symbolic, as well as literal interpretations of the Two Witnesses, as Israel<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/two_witnesses.htm |title=Israel and the Church as the Two Witnesses of Revelation 11 and Daniel 12 |accessdate=2007-06-29 |publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (the "two olive trees") and the Church (the "two lampstands") creates a great deal of eschatological debate<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/lasttrumpet_2000/debate_1a.html |title=Dichotomy or Continuity Between the Present and Past Dispensations: Opening Argument |accessdate=2007-06-29 |last=Warner |first=Tim |date=[[2002]]-[[08-07]] |work=Progressive Dispensationalism: Debate Between Dr. Mal Couch & Tim Warner |publisher=Conservative Theological Society}}</ref> between strict Dispensationalists and Progressive Dispensationalists;<ref name="warner-intro">{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/~lasttrumpet/ |title=Introduction & Methodology |accessdate=2007-06-29 |last=Warner |first=Tim |date= |year=2002 |month=November |work=The Last Trumpet |publisher=Post-Trib Research Center}}</ref> whereas such debate may be considered as non sequitur insofar as [[Preterism|Preterists]] and Historicists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.historicism.net/ |title=Historicism Research Foundation |accessdate=2006-06-30}}</ref> whose views of the Two Witnesses place them outside the chronological timeline (70 AD for Preterists)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.preterist.org/whatispreterism.asp |title=What is the Preterist View of Bible Prophecy? |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=2007 |publisher=International Preterist Association}}</ref> or wholly in the realm of the symbolic - relegated to the Church only in any future unfolding of prophecy as seen by many Historicists.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.historicism.com/Haynes/2witness.htm |title=The Meaning of the "Two Witnesses" |accessdate=2007-06-30 |last=Haynes |first=J. L |work=Historicism.com}}</ref><br />
<br />
Views among those who adhere to a literal one-thousand years [[Premillennialism|premillennial]] earthly kingdom (i.e., the millennium is yet future) complicate the Church's participation in the 70th Week of Daniel (i.e., yet future). The three dominant positions among these Premillenarians (be they evangelical,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wheaton.edu/isae/defining_evangelicalism.html |title=Defining Evangelicalism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=2005 |month=April |publisher=Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals}}</ref> Catholic<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10307a.htm |title=Millennium and Millenarianism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |year=1911 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> or Orthodox<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:F7d0BUBkjf4J:www.conservativeonline.org/journals/02_04_journal/1998v2n4_id02.htm+Early+Church+Fathers+Millenarians&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1 |title=The Early Church Fathers and the Foundations of Dispensationalism |accessdate=2007-06-30 |last=Crutchfield |first=Larry V}}</ref> Christians - and for that matter, among other Christian sects)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=21209 |title=Christian Millenarianism/Indiana University Press |accessdate=2007-06-30}}</ref> regarding the final 70th Week of Daniel insofar as the Church's participation concerns are: Pretribulational<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/rr-pretribulation-rapture.html |title=The Pretribulation Rapture |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Strandberg |first=Todd |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> (the Church will rapture<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/search-results.php?author=3&related=true |title=Other articles by Dr. Thomas Ice |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |year=2003 |publisher=Pre-Trib Research Center}}</ref> at the commencement of the 70th Week of Daniel),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://jesus-is-the-way.com/RevOutline.html |title=Outline and Chronology of Endtimes in the Book of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-19 |date=[[2007]]-[[05-27]]|work=Jesus-is-the-way.com}}</ref> whose commencement is normally announced by the infamous "Treaty of Hell and Death"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gotlinks.com/earticles/articles/107731-your-covenant-with-death___your-agreement-with-hell___the-u_s_-israel-strategic-alliance.html |title=Your Covenant with Death...Your Agreement With Hell...The U.S.-Israel Strategic Alliance |accessdate=2007-08-19 |last=Krieger |first=Doug |date=[[2005]]-[[12-25]]}}</ref> (i.e., the treaty or "defense pact" of the Antichrist with Israel);<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/pdf/Ice-TheIsraeliElections.pdf |title=The Israeli Elections |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |format=PDF |work=Pre-trib.org}}</ref> Mid-Tribulational<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nobts.edu/Faculty/ItoR/LemkeSW/Personal/midtribulationism.html |title=The Biblical Case for Mid-Tribulationalism |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Lemke |first=Steve W}} </ref> or "Pre-Wrath"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/athens/forum/5951/prewrath.html |title=A review of the Pre-Wrath rapture of the Church |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Stanton |first=Gerald B}}</ref> (the Church will be raptured in the middle of Daniel's 70th Week - i.e., after approximately three-and-one-half years); and Post-Tribulational<ref name="warner-intro"/> (the Church will be raptured will take place at the end of the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.intergate.com/~subi/linksecc.htm |title=The Return of Jesus Christ |accessdate=2007-08-23}}</ref> just prior to the "wrath of God"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0026.html |title=Are the seals of Revelation 6 the wrath of God? |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Lee-Warner |first=Bill |work=Sola Scriptura}}</ref> or "wrath of the Lamb").<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.geocities.com/worldview_3/2prewrath.html |title=The "Pre-Wrath Rapture Teaching" Evaluated |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Totten |first=Rhett |year=1999 |work=The Second Coming of Christ and Rapture Site}}</ref> Some theologians believe that the two olive branches represent the peace on Earth that the witnesses try to bring to the sinful Earth, and the two lampstands represent the light for Christ that they shine for Christ. <br />
<br />
Post-Tribulational icon Dr. Robert H. Gundry (Westmont College) states in his classic, ''The Church and the Tribulation'',<ref>ISBN 978-0310254010</ref> especially in reference to Post-tribulationalism and the identity of the Two Witnesses - having both the Church and Israel throughout the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy presents formidable eschatological challenges to wit:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“If the Church is to go through the tribulation, God will work simultaneously with two groups of covenant people, Israel and the Church. Millenarians of all varieties, including pretribulationists, should find the possibility of such simultaneous workings hard to deny . . . But it is not merely a matter of dealing with two groups at once. It is a matter of dealing simultaneously with, and through, two groups of redeemed people and witnesses. Will two diverse groups of saints, those who belong to the Church and those who belong to Israel coexist on earth and perhaps live according to different regulations? If so, will the tribulational Church be composed exclusively of Gentile believers? Will two distinct companies of witnesses preach the Gospel, maybe variations of it? Such questions arise quite naturally if we take the tribulation as transitional. But the mere existence of these questions does not preclude the possibility of the presence of the Church in the tribulation.” (''The Church and the Tribulation'', Robert H. Gundry, Zondervan Publishing House, 1973, p. 23).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
What Gundry suggests is anathema to strict Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.angelfire.com/ms/seanie/disp/disp2.html |title=Dispensationalism and its errors Part 2 |accessdate=2007-08-23 |work=Sean's Faith Website}}</ref> whose pre-tribulationalism demands a complete separation of the Church from Israel<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.reformationtheology.com/2006/06/pretribpremillleft_behind.php |title=Pre-Trib?...Pre-Mill?....Left Behind |accessdate=2007-08-23 |date=[[2006]]-[[06-23]] |work=Reformation Theology}} Quoting from Samuel E. Waldron, ''The End Times Made Simple''.</ref> and a primary commitment of the Almighty to Israel within the crucible of the 70th Week of Daniel--although Dispensationalists recognize a redemptive witness to the Gentiles through the evangelistic witness of the 144,000<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.solagroup.org/articles/faqs/faq_0023.html |title=Who are the 144,000? |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Cooper |first=Charles |work=Sola Scriptura}}</ref> Jewish evangelists. Those "saints"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/rr-tribulation-saint.html |title=Tribulation Saint Wannabes |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Strandberg |first=Todd |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> evangelized through this preaching of the "gospel of the kingdom"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/AnInterpretationofMatthew24_25_12.html |title=An Interpretation of Matthew 24—25, Part XII |accessdate=2007-08-23 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> and who perish under the onslaught of the beast, constitute the tribulation saints<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.plymouthbrethren.com/cactrib.htm |title=Tribulation Saints (extract) |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Coates |first=C. A |work=PlymouthBrethren.com}}</ref> who "come out of great tribulation."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.grantjeffrey.com/article/why_some_reject.htm |title=Why Do Some Teach that the Church will Endure the Tribulation? |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Jeffrey |first=Grant R |work=Prophecy On Line |publisher=Grant R. Jeffrey Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
==Religious-political ramifications of Israel and the Church==<br />
<br />
Obvious collaboration between the "witnesses" is "eschatologically suggested" by those who espouse the two to be Israel and the Church--what form of cooperative witness seems crucial; especially with regards to the religious-political ramifications thereof. Naturally, evangelical support for the nation of Israel is viewed by a growing number of Israeli Jews, as well as diasporic Jews (especially Zionists), as beneficial to the survival of Israel and highly influential upon American foreign policy,<ref>{{cite news |first=David D |last=Kirkpatrick |title=For Evangelicals, Supporting Israel Is ‘God's Foreign Policy’ |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/14/washington/14israel.html?ex=1321160400&en=60ed9b6dede3816e&ei=5090 |work=The New York Times |date=[[2006]]-[[11-14]] |accessdate=2007-08-24}}</ref> whether the imagery of the Two Witnesses is reflected in this Evangelical-Jewish Zionist alliance or not. Furthermore, if the book of Revelation is to be viewed as a cosmic courtroom wherein the "Great City" is on trial, and the "Judge of all the earth" is pending a conviction by calling forth witnesses to "testify" against Babylon the Great (i.e., "the Holy City" vs. the "Great City" or New Jerusalem vs. Babylon the Great)<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000026.htm#26c |title=Chapter VIII: Tribulation & Judgment |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Shearer |first=S.R |work=The New Antipas Papers |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref> - then "Biblical collaboration" at the mouth of "two witnesses"<ref>Deuteronomy 19:15.</ref> prior to a conviction and ultimate sentence would be mandatory.<br />
<br />
David Brog, former chief counsel and later chief of staff to Senator Arlen Specter, recently highlighted the current support for Israel, among evangelical Christians in his book ''Stand with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State''.<ref>ISBN 978-1591859062.</ref> Brog's central thesis, both as a Jewish American and as the current Executive Director of the newly-formed Christians United for Israel, is unabashedly pro-Israel,<ref>{{cite news |first=Margot |last=Patterson |title=Evangelicals rally for Israel, warn of Iran threat |url=http://ncronline.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2006c/072806/072806h.php |work=National Catholic Reporter |date=[[2006]]-[[07-28]] |accessdate=2007-08-24}}</ref> and affirms that evangelical support for Israel should be encouraged by American Jews, as well as provide a forum for evangelical Christians to express their views on Capitol Hill. He is at the helm in galvanizing support for this newly-founded Evangelical-Jewish lobbying organization<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060814/new_christian_zionism |title=Birth Pangs of a New Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-08-24 |last=Blumenthal |first=Max |date=[[2006]]-[[08-08]] |work=TheNation.com}}</ref> on behalf of Israel. Brog, who is Jewish-not a Christian, has an executive board for Christians United for Israel consisting of prominent evangelicals: Michael Little,<ref name="cufi">{{cite web |url=http://www.cufi.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_executive_board |title=Executive Board |accessdate=2007-08-25 |year=2007 |publisher=Christians United for Israel}}</ref> [[John Hagee]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3323758,00.html |title=A blessing or a curse? American evangelists explained |accessdate=2007-08-25 |last=Benhorin |first=Yitzhak |date=[[2006]]-[[11-05]] |work=Ynetnews.com}}</ref> Gary Bauer,<ref name="cufi"/> and George Morrison<ref name="cufi"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fbci.org/aboutus/george.html |title=Meet Pastor George |accessdate=2007-08-25 |publisher=Faith Bible Chapel}}</ref> — all evangelicals, and all actively engaged in pro-Israel activities — activities which include "A Night to Honor Israel"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jhm.org/honorisrael.asp |title=A Night To Honor Israel |accessdate=2007-08-26 |work=John Hagee Ministries}}</ref> held throughout North America, as well as recent involvement<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5193092.stm |title=Evangelical Christians plead for Israel |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Greene |first=Richard Allen |date=[[2006]]-[[07-19]] |work=BBC News}}</ref> in the annual AIPAC gathering in Washington, D.C.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:tyCLPx6SrFUJ:www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=w050523&s=baer052605+AIPAC+COURTS+EVANGELICALS&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=5 |title=Security Measures |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Baer |first=Kenneth |date=[[2005]]-[[05-26]] |work=TNR Online |publisher=The New Republic}}</ref> ([[Jerry Falwell]] was also a member of the executive board of Christians United for Israel until his death.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cufi.org/site/PageServer?pagename=media_press_releases#Falwell |title=Dr. Jerry Falwell- A Pioneer of Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Hagee |first=John |date=[[2007]]-[[05-16]] |work=Christians United for Israel}}</ref>) Such support for Israel is vehemently opposed by many on the left and right.<br />
<br />
Christian Zionism – a phenomenon commenced in Great Britain<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4959.htm |title=Christians and Zion: British stirrings |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Wagner |first=Donald |date=[[2003]]-[[10-09]] |work=The Daily Star |publisher=Information Clearing House}}</ref> in support of the Jewish State and championed by many American evangelical leaders<ref>{{cite web |url=http://mb-soft.com/believe/text/czionism.htm |title=Christian Zionism: Advanced Information |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Rausch |first=D A |year=1997 |month=May |work=Elwell Evangelical Dictionary |publisher=BELIEVE Religious Information Source}}</ref> throughout the past century, sees in Israel's rebirth the fulfillment of Bible prophecy<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewsonfirst.org/06bprint/fp013p.html |title=Mr. Hagee Draws Evangelicals By Arguing Jewish State Fulfills Biblical Prophecy |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Higgins |first=Andrew |date=[[2006]]-[[07-27]] |work=The Wall Street Journal |publisher=JewsOnFirst.org}}</ref> and the countdown to the Second Coming of Christ.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2002/07/10/MN17001.DTL |title=U.S. Christians find cause to aid Israel: Evangelicals financing immigrants, settlements |accessdate=2007-09-08 |last=Haas |first=Danielle |date=[[2002]]-[[07-10]] |work=San Francisco Chronicle |pages=A-1}}</ref> The proliferation of evangelical Christian organizations or Jewish organizations reaching out to one another with the common goal of supporting the survival of the nation of Israel in the U.S. and elsewhere includes: Bridges for Peace<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bridgesforpeace.com/h2n.php?fn=whoarewe.html |title=A Concise Summary of Who We Are |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2006 |publisher=Bridges for Peace}}</ref>; the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ifcj.org/site/PageServer?pagename=endorsements_ministries |title=Churches and Ministries that Support Israel |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2007 |publisher=International Fellowship of Christians and Jews}}</ref>; the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.icej.org/articles/about_us |title=About Us: Your Embassy in Jerusalem |accessdate=2007-09-09 |publisher=International Christian Embassy Jerusalem}}</ref>; Operation Exodus<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.operation-exodus.org/Operation-Exodus/about_ebenezer |title=About Ebenezer |accessdate=2007-09-09 |year=2007 |work=Operation Exodus |publisher=Ebenezer Emergency Fund International}}</ref>; Israel Awareness Day<ref><br />
{{cite web |url=http://www.easy-access.com/Ariel/Autumn96/Aut96-Page4.html |title=Faith Bible Chapel Adopts Ariel |accessdate=2007-12-16 |year=1996 |month=Autumn |work=Shalom Ariel |publisher=Ariel Development Fund |pages=4-5}}</ref> (and their writings<ref name="standing">{{cite book |last=Brog |first=David |title=Standing with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State |year=2006 |publisher=Frontline |isbn=9781591859062}}</ref> attest as well). Likewise, but with less verbosity are those mainline Christian organizations<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.loveandjustice.org/AlternateVoice/index.htm |title=Alternative Voice to Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |publisher=First Congregational Church}}</ref> and some evangelical leaders<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=2717 |title=The Evangelical-Jewish Alliance |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Wagner |first=Donald |date=[[2003]]-[[06-28]] |work=The Christian Century |pages=20-24}}</ref> (along with their writings)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.christianzionism.org/articlesN.asp |title=Challenging Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |year=2007}}</ref> who oppose the current alliance between Jews and evangelicals in support of Israel and her policies.<br />
<br />
Most evangelical churches and organizations in the USA in support of Israel are Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:jCEzcYlEhh4J:psreview.org/content/view/45/99/+Premillenarian+support+for+Israel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=12|title=Premillenarian}}</ref> in their ''Weltanschauung'' – with the majority being pretribulational;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:JPO9QHB5P2EJ:www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1746536/posts?page=14+Pre-Trib+and+Pro-Israel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4|title=pretribulational;}}</ref> hence, criticism on the part of many Jews that the main purpose of such support for Israel among evangelicals is self-interest and spurious at best,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewsonfirst.org/christian_zionists.php |title=Christian Zionists: Fundamentalist Christians' support of Israel could blunt Jewish opposition to religious right agenda |accessdate=2007-12-16 |work=Jews On First!}}</ref> and conversionary<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Zionism/christianzionism.html |title=Christian Zionism |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Krusch |first=David |year=2007 |work=Jewish Virtual Library |publisher=American-Israeli Cooperative Exchange}}</ref> at worst. Furthermore, some evangelicals propose that the current Evangelical-Jewish alliance in support of Israel will not last and is contrary to Bible prophecy.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000140.htm |title=The Religious Right and Israel; A Relationship That Cannot Hold, Part III |accessdate=2007-12-16 |last=Shearer |first=S.R. |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
In addition to these suspicions from both Jews and evangelical Christians, there is religious-political angst expressed amongst co-religionists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.antipasministries.com/html/file0000243.htm |title=The Neo-Conservatives |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Shearer |first=S. R |date=[[2006]]-[[12-12]] |publisher=Antipas Ministries}}</ref> (Jewish and Christian) who view this Jewish-Christian solidarity on behalf of Israel as a mixture of Church and State and ''ipso facto'' contrary to the American experiment;<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?ID=1174 |title=Renewing the American Experiment: A Post Election Reflection |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Korten |first=David |date=2004-11-07 |work=Yes! Online}}</ref> especially, as it pertains to [[neoconservatives|neocons]] both within<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.counterpunch.org/green02282004.html |title=Serving Two Flags: Neo-Cons, Israel and the Bush Administration |accessdate=2007-12-17 |last=Green |first=Stephen |date=2004-02-28 |work=Counterpunch}}</ref> and without<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.alternet.org/story/15481/ |title=All in the Neocon Family |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Lobe |first=Jim |date=2003-03-27 |work=AlterNet |publisher=Independent Media Institute}}</ref> the immediate US political administration, who some say are egging the alliance forward to suffice their own socio-political agenda and have little or no spiritual interest in the dynamic. They point out that ''theocons'' (in particular American Catholics),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=518 |title=RJN: Neocons v. Theocons: The Sequel |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Neuhaus |first=Richard John |date=2006-11-03 |work=First Things: On the Square}}</ref> who are allied with neocons (notwithstanding Jewish suspicions from time to time among the neocons)<ref>{{cite journal |last=Moore |first=Scott H. |year=1998 |month=Winter |title=The End of Convenient Stereotypes: How the ''First Things'' and Baxter Controversies Inaugurate Extraordinary Politics |journal=Pro Ecclesia |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=17–47 |url=http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/essays/Stereotypes.html |accessdate= 2007-12-18}}</ref> are drawing American evangelicals, who affirm they are under "Biblical mandate" to "bless Israel",<ref name="standing"/> into a religio-politico maelstrom<ref>{{cite press release |title=Cliff Potts Releases Theocon Nation: The Unvarnished, Politically Incorrect Truth About the Roots, Threat and Response to the Religious Right Political Movement |date=[[2006]]-[[05-26]] |url=http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/5/prweb390704.htm |accessdate=2007-12-18}}</ref> which, in the end, will politicize the American Church<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/prophetic_sequence_pt12.htm |title=Theo-Neo-Paleo Cons: …I saw a woman mounted on a Scarlet-colored Beast (Rev. 17:3 – ASV/the Message: Part XII – The Prophetic Sequence |accessdate=2007-12-18 |last=Krieger |first=Doug |publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> and compromise her "spiritual mission" and put America into a "crusader" mindset<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.damonlinker.com/ |title=Damon Linker |accessdate=2007-12-24 |last=Linker |first=Damon}}</ref> in defeating [[Islamism|radical Islamists]] and hedonist [[secularism]] in America, rather than fulfilling the ''Great Commission'' of Jesus in the saving of souls for the coming [[Premillennialism|premillenarian]] kingdom, not the [[Kingdom Now theology|"kingdom now"]]. Instead, Theocons are now about galvanizing Evangelicals and Catholics<ref>{{cite news |title=Evangelicals & Catholics Together: The Christian Mission in the Third Millennium |url=http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9405/articles/mission.html |work=First Things |pages=15-22 |date=May 1994 |accessdate=2007-12-24}}</ref> in a great crusade against American hedonistic secularization and, interestingly enough, Israel is inadvertently caught up within that dynamic.<br />
<br />
==Exegetical considerations==<br />
<br />
In attempting to [[Biblical exegesis|exegete]] Revelation 11 commentators who hold to a Premillenarian eschatology generally fall into three areas of interpretation in the identification of the Two Witnesses: (1) The Two Witnesses are individuals either manifested in some form of reincarnation; or “in the spirit” of Biblical prophets who once appeared in Bible history; or simply as two individuals newly arrived on the earth; (2) the Two Witnesses are corporate in nature (human) standing for the Church only or for Israel only; or both Israel and the Church; or for both Jewish and Gentiles believers in Jesus; and (3) the Two Witnesses express Biblical concepts (i.e., the Old and New Testaments; the Law and the Prophets; Mercy and Grace).<br />
<br />
Their chronological order aside, the purpose and destiny of the Two Witnesses is to decry the reign of the Antichrist-Beast,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tribulation.com/beast.htm |title=The Dragon and Two Beasts of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-26 |date=[[2006-09-21]] |work=Tribulation.com |publisher=Atlantis Station}}</ref> and to attest against that “Great City”— (or Whore of Babylon, Babylon the Great. Likewise, in that they are called to “prophesy” and wear “sackcloth”<ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:3|141}}</ref> (a Biblical designation of a “call to repentance”) they assuredly are at the nexus of announcing the “gospel of the kingdom.”<ref>{{bibleverse||Matthew|24:14|141}}</ref><br />
<br />
John's Apocalypse (i.e., The Revelation of Jesus Christ) is considered by most Christian theologians to be the apostolic writings which incorporate more Hebrew (i.e., Old Testament) Scriptures into the text than any other book of the New Testament.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=1171 |title=Premillennialism in the Old Testament (Part 1) |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Fruchtenbaum |first=Arnold G. |date=[[2006-10-26]] |work=Believer's Web}}</ref> The images, symbolism, and allegorical language used throughout the Revelation are impossible to fathom or interpret without a fairly comprehensive knowledge of the original "Testament".<br />
<br />
===Israel and the Church as the “corporate witness"===<br />
<br />
Interconnected with Revelation 11, as some commentators have acknowledged<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.teachinghearts.org/dre17hrev11.html |title=Lesson 15: The Two Witnesses(Revelation 11)|accessdate=2007-08-26}}</ref>, is the imagery found in the latter part of {{bibleverse||Revelation|10:8-10|141}}:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Then the voice which I heard from heaven spoke to me again and said, ‘Go, take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel who stands on the sea and on the earth.’ So I went to the angel and said to him, ‘Give me the little book.’ And he said to me, ‘Take and eat it; and it will make your stomach bitter, but it will be as sweet as honey in your mouth.’ Then I took the little book out of the angel's hand and ate it, and it was as sweet as honey in my mouth. But when I had eaten it, my stomach became bitter. And he said to me, ‘You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
John becomes a symbol of prophetic witness to the world—becoming wholly identified with the prophetic message; and, subsequently, that prophetic witness must be declared: “You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings.” Then John is given a “reed like a measuring rod” and told to “Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there. But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles . . . and they (the Gentiles) will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months.”<ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:2|141}}</ref><br />
<br />
The “court” referenced here appears to be an allusion to the “Court of the Gentiles”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bible-history.com/jewishtemple/JEWISH_TEMPLEThe_Court_of_the_Gentiles.htm |title=The Court of the Gentiles |accessdate=2007-08-26}}</ref> which during the sacerdotal rites in ancient Jerusalem provided “uncircumcised gentiles” who were interested in the Jewish religion to venture into the temple complex but not into the area of the sacrificial altar; hence, they were not full participants and remained on the peripheral of full commitment; unless, of course, they were willing to be circumcised. Numerous Christian commentaries perceive the issue of circumcision as a matter of the heart and the cutting away of the “flesh” an experiential expression of Christian commitment to holiness and sanctification--Paul, the Apostle, repeatedly enunciates deeper understanding of "spiritual circumcision"<ref>{{bibleverse||Romans|2:28-29|141}}; {{bibleverse||Philippians|3:8|141}}; {{bibleverse||Colossians|2:11|141}}.</ref><br />
<br />
Those willing to “pay the price” – having their flesh cut off (i.e., their “hearts dealt with”) – are those “measured at the altar of sacrifice.”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://pastorbryan.blogspot.com/2006/11/inner-life.html |title=The Inner Life |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Galloway |first=Bryan |date=[[2006-11-21]] |work=Praying for Revival!}}</ref> Hence, immediately following this imagery, the “holy city”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ucg.org/booklets/RV/twowomen.htm |title=The Two Women of Revelation |accessdate=2007-08-26 |year=2007 |work=The Book of Revelation Unveiled |publisher= United Church of God}}</ref> is mentioned for the first time in the Revelation. Some commentators have recognized this connection and affirm that the “holy city” and those measured at the altar are one in the same.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://users.bigpond.net.au/bkolberg/chapters/chapter20.html |title=Revelation 11 and the Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Kolberg |first=Bruno |work=Daniel's Fourth Kingdom}}</ref> Ultimately, it is that “holy city” which is juxtaposed to the “great city” in other portions of the Revelation.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wcg.org/lit/prophecy/babylon.htm |title=Who Is "Babylon"? |accessdate=2007-08-26 |last=Kroll |first=Paul |publisher=Worldwide Church of God}}</ref> Likewise, the first mentioning of the “great city” occurs in Revelation 11, verse 8. The ultimate expression of the "divine masterpiece" (i.e., the work of God, "the Woman, the Lamb's Bride" is viewed as the New Jerusalem in {{bibleverse||Revelation|21:10-21|141}}, along with two proper names describing her gates and foundations: "twelve gates . . . with names written on them, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel . . . twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (again, Israel and the Church). Once the holy city is announced as the receptacle of gentile antagonism (tread the holy city underfoot), there is the immediate prophetic declaration:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy one thousand two hundred and sixty days, clothed in sackcloth. <ref>{{bibleverse||Revelation|11:3}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Thus, John's representation of the prophet is now “transferred” to the prophetic ministry of the Two Witnesses. The disclosure that these Two Witnesses (the Greek word for witness is ''martus'' (μαρτυς), which is also translated as "martyr"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRGRK31.htm#S3144 |title=King James Bible Strong's Greek Dictionary |accessdate=2007-12-24}}</ref>) foretells their ultimate destiny. Furthermore, they are immediately identified as: "These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth" (Revelation 11:4).<br />
<br />
Those embracing Israel and the Church as the Two Witnesses identify the number "two"<ref>{{cite book |last=Bullinger |first=E. W. |title=Number in Scripture: Its Supernatural Design and Spiritual Significance |origyear=1921 |url=http://philologos.org/__eb-nis/two.htm |accessdate=2007-12-24 |edition=4th ed. rev. |year=2001 |publisher=Eyre & Spottiswoode (Bible Warehouse) |location=London}}</ref> connoting the “witness of Israel”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://christianactionforisrael.org/witness/witness.html |title=Witness to the Nations |accessdate=2007-12-25 |publisher=Christian Action for Israel}}</ref> to the gentile nations during the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks{{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}; as well as the fact that the "olive tree"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.levitt.com/essays/olivetree.html |title=What is the Olive Tree? |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=McCall |first=Thomas S. |year=2001 |month=March |work=Levitt Letter |publisher=Zola Levitt Ministries}}</ref> in the Scripture signifies Israel. The "witness of the Church" is signified by the "two lampstands"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.restoringthevision.com/Ch11RtheV.htm |title=Restoring the Vision of the End Times Church |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Kuenzi |first=Vernon L. |year=2001}}</ref> whose identity was disclosed by the “seven golden lampstands” (i.e., candlesticks) revealed in Revelation 2-3 as the “churches.”<br />
<br />
Furthermore, this imagery clearly harkens back to Zechariah 4 and the “two sons of oil” or “two olive trees” who astride the “golden lamp stand” seen by [[Zechariah]] the prophet.<ref>Zechariah 4:2-4, 11-14.</ref> Zerubbabel, the governor, and Joshua the High Priest (the kingship and the priesthood) are seen by the Almighty wholly empowered for the rebuilding of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem or ''Third Temple'' after its destruction under [[Nebuchadrezzar II|King Nebuchadnezzar II]]: “Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, says the Lord.”<ref>Zechariah 4:6.</ref> <br />
<br />
Extending Zechariah's vision to the Revelation, John sees in the midst of the seven golden lamp stands, “one like unto the Son of Man.” Therefore, as Zechariah's vision saw the “kingship and the priesthood” on either side of the “universal lamp stand” – even so, that prophetic illumination is seen in the Revelation as the Son of Man, the “spirit of prophecy” disseminating light and life to the churches as the present “work of God” – as the work of the Almighty was expressed in Zechariah 4 – the work of God is expressed in Revelation 1 and confirmed by the bringing together in testimony and witness the ministry of the prophet; thus, is Christ's work as “prophet, priest, and king”<ref>{{cite web|url=http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:LKLx-OjNTEkJ:www.modernreformation.org/kr95triple.htm+Zechariah+4+-+Christ+is+Prophet,+Priest,+and+King&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2|title=king"}}</ref> fully declared through the Two Witnesses.<br />
<br />
Again, those who hold to the “corporate nature” of these Two Witnesses point out that the further disclosures of what they “do” over against who they “are” does not negate their identities but affirms that their witness is to the earth (i.e., Israel – turning the waters into blood and striking “the earth with all plagues, as often as they desire”) and to the heavens (i.e., the Church – “have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy”). Here, the Apostle Paul's writings of the Church's “heavenly stature” confirms such a witness; whereas Israel's call to be a “light to the gentiles” confirms their original commission.<ref>Ephesians 6:10-13.</ref><br />
<br />
Those<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/articles/individualism_and_the_american_church.htm |title=Individualism and the American Church ... How American Culture Distorts our Perception of the Church |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=Shearer |first=Douglas R. |date=1993-06-29 |work=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> adhering to a corporate expression of the Two Witnesses point out that “Reformational Christianity”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://thebigpicture.homestead.com/files/CHRISTIANITYANDCULTURE.html |title=Christianity and Culture: The Case for Reformational Cultural Activism |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=Strauss |first=Gideon |date=1992-10-02}}</ref> has distorted our perception (especially in America) of one's identity. By this is meant that the [[Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] and [[Protestant Reformation|Reformation]] laid stress upon one's “individualism” (i.e., salvation is a “personal encounter with Christ” and not a salvivic experience through one's identity with the Church—“saved in the Church”). It is this identification with the individual juxtaposed to one's personhood reflected in the collective group that misses the spiritual dimension of Revelation 11 (i.e., “in Christ” or “in Adam” connotes corporate identification).<ref>1 Corinthians 15:22.</ref><br />
<br />
Once they “finish their testimony” the unveiling, and first mention in the Revelation of the ''The Beast'' who ascends out of the ''bottomless pit'', is made. They pay the uttermost price for their testimony: “the beast . . . will make war against them, overcome them, and kill them” (Rev. 11:7). The word used for ''war'' in the Greek connotes a major conflagration, not a skirmish or interpersonal struggle; thereby drawing attention to the corporate nature of the conflict between the beast and the Two Witnesses; for the beast would not make ''war'' against two individuals (Greek: ''polemos'' - see Strong's Greek 4171).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRGRK41.htm|title=4171).}}</ref><br />
<br />
Then their “body” (the Greek singular is used: ''ptoma''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/STRGRK44.htm#S4430|title=''ptoma''}}</ref> -meaning ''corpes'') lies exposed in the “street of the great city” which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.” (vs. 8). To illustrate that this city is the “great city” juxtaposed to the “holy city” – and not Jerusalem – the ''Spirit Filled Life Bible'' footnote affirms these witnesses face off with the worldly system, the great city, headed up by the beast: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The great city is not literally the physical city of Jerusalem, but spiritually the world in rebellion against God. Sodom symbolizes immorality, and Egypt symbolizes the political oppression of the people of God in this world where our Lord was crucified. (''The Spirit Filled Life Bible'', Thomas Nelson Bibles,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.seekgod.ca/hayford.htm|title=Bibles,}}</ref> P. 1831)<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
This argument is reinforced by Rev. 11:8 pointedly stating that the great city is “spiritually” or “allegorically” called Sodom and Egypt—and Jerusalem is never mentioned in the text; however, many commentators do not see a problem in this—because the phrase “where also our Lord was crucified” must mean Jerusalem; for Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem. Others counter—Jesus was crucified “outside the camp”<ref>Hebrews 13:13.</ref>– “outside the gate”<ref>Hebrews 13:12.</ref> (not in Jerusalem proper) by the Romans (gentiles) and this Revelation passage appears to back this notion of the “great city” doing the work of crucifixion.<br />
<br />
Posttribulationists,<ref>{{Citation |last=Willems |first=Arthur G. |title =Book Review: The Church and the Tribulation |newspaper=Direction |pages=34–35 |date=April 1976 |url=http://www.directionjournal.org/article/?202}}</ref> who see this dual witness of Israel and the Church (in counterdistinction to premillenarian-pretribulationists who accuse these posttribulationists of “blurring” the traditional dispensational distinctions of Israel and the Church),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ldolphin.org/progdispen.html |title=A Proper Biblical D.I.E.T. |accessdate=2007-12-27 |last=McCall |first=Tom |coauthors=Zola Levitt |year=2000 |month=February |work=Levitt Letter}}</ref> likewise adhere to the 3 ½ days of “their body” exposed to the “open persecution” ("their body lies in the street of the great city"; i.e., the 42 months aforementioned in Revelation 11:2) as the final three-and-one-half years of Prophecy of Seventy Weeks of Daniel's Prophecy and that the days mentioned here are years (i.e., the 70th Week represents seven years and 3 ½ days represents 1,260 days, 42 months, 3 ½ years, or time, times, and half a time)(See: 2300 Days or Day-year principle). <br />
<br />
Therefore, it is at the very close of the 70th Week of Daniel's prophecy that the Two Witnesses are resurrected—there is no secret rapture (i.e., they are seen by all the inhabitants of the earth; Rev. 11:11)—a loud voice is heard from heaven calling all the “righteous dead” in the resurrection and those that are “alive and survive” the great tribulation are, as Paul proclaims: “The dead in Christ shall rise first, then we which are alive and ''remain'' (Grk. ''perileipo'' meaning ''survive'' - Strong's Greek: 4035).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/STRGRK40.htm|title=4035).}}</ref> shall be caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air” (I Thessalonians 4:16-17).<br />
<br />
Once again, it must be pointed out that Historicists see this 1,260-day period as 1,260 years and believe it is the time of the Papacy's<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.heraldmag.org/literature/proph_38.htm |title=The Man of Sin |accessdate=2007-12-31}}</ref> “rule and reign” as the antichrist system between A.D. 538 and 1798 (i.e., from the time the Roman Church was recognized as the “civil authority” until the time of [[Napoleon]]'s imprisoning of Pope Pius VI and his death in 1798).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Ott |first=Michael T. |year=1911 |work=The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref><br />
<br />
The subsequent passages in Revelation 11:13-19 are interpreted by Post-tribulationists as confirmation that the pouring out of the “wrath of God” (i.e., after the resurrection and rapture) is seen "in the same hour" (Revelation 11:13). Immediately, Messiah's descending from the heavens to establish His earthly kingdom and the famous sounds of Handel's Messiah, and of John's prophetic testimony, are heard:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The kingdoms of this world have now become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Messiah (Christ), and he shall reign forever and ever! (Rev. 11:15)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Revelation declares: “The Testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”<ref>Revelation 19:10.</ref> – therefore, as their deliverer testified on earth for 3 ½ years,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.carm.org/questions/Jesus_age.htm |title=How old was Jesus when He was crucified? |accessdate=2007-12-31 |year=2007 |work=Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry}}</ref> was crucified, arose from the dead, ascended to heaven – even so, this is the destiny of all those who will follow the Messiah--this is the "testimony of Jesus".<ref>Revelation 1:2.</ref> Furthermore, the extremity of believers who profess to have the "Testimony of Jesus" may be called to give the ultimate sacrifice in bearing witness to the One Who gave His all: "Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their '''witness''' to Jesus and for the word of God" (Rev. 20:4).<br />
<br />
===Church or concepts===<br />
<br />
Evangelical [[postmillennialism]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.pre-trib.org/pdf/Ice-WhatisPostmillennial.pdf |title=What Is Postmillenialism? Tom's Perspectives |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Ice |first=Thomas |format=PDF}}</ref> as well as St. Augustine's amillennialism,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://persweb.wabash.edu/facstaff/royaltyr/augustine.htm |title=Augustine and the Millennium |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Hutchinson |first=John M.}}</ref> accord future roles for the Two Witnesses in their commentaries; however, those roles are wholly symbolic of the Church's singular witness to the world. As Amillenarian Tony Warren declares:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
These two witnesses of Revelation eleven are a ‘symbol’ of God's faithful servants, the true eternal indivisible Church.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://members.aol.com/twarren17/rev11.html |title=A verse by verse exposition of Revelation Chapter 11 |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Warren |first=Tony |date=2002-10-14 |work=The Mountain Retreat}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Hence, the Church is the “Israel of God”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://members.aol.com/twarren13/israel2.html |title=The True Israel of God |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Shelton |first=L. R. |work=The Mountain Retreat}}</ref> – and the concluding witness of the Church, as originally propounded by Augustine,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/millenni.htm |title=Eschatology, End Times, and Millennialism: Competing Theories |accessdate=2007-12-31 |last=Robinson |first=B. A. |date=2006-08-18 |work=ReligiousTolerance.org |publisher=Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance}} </ref> will endure to the end of the age as a demonstration of “the age-long struggle of evil against Christ's rule.” Israel and the Church constitute one people of God—there is no literal seven-year tribulation on earth. Evangelical postmillennialism also sees Israel and the Church as the one people of God; however, the Millennium will be a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ, realized through the church's ministry of the kingdom of God.<br />
<br />
They who adhere to the singular witness of the Church until the [[Second Coming]] of Christ, affirm the Church's unique testimony until the [[Eschatology|eschaton]]. <br />
<br />
The 1599 Geneva Study Bible<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GenevaStudyBible/gen.cgi?book=re&chapter=011)|title=Bible}}</ref> asserts the two witnesses as the exclusive purvue of the church:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
1) The authority of the intended revelation being declared, together with the necessity of that calling which was particularly imposed on John after which follows the history of the estate of Christ his Church, both conflicting or warring, and overcoming in Christ. For the true Church of Christ is said to fight against that which is falsely so called, over which Antichrist rules, Christ Jesus overthrowing Antichrist by the spirit of his mouth: and Christ is said to overcome most gloriously until he shall slay Antichrist by the appearance of his coming, as the apostle teaches in (2 Thessalonians 2:8). So this history has two parts: One of the state of the Church conflicting with temptations until Chapter 16. The other of the state of the same church obtaining victory, thence to Chapter 20. The first part has two sections most conveniently distributed into their times, of which the first contains a history of the Christian Church for 1260 years, what time the gospel of Christ was as it were taken up from among men into heaven: the second contains a history of the same Church to the victory perfected. These two sections are briefly, though distinctly propounded in this chapter, but both of them are discoursed after in due order.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
This comment from the Geneva Study Bible is made on Revelation 11:4:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks standing before the God of the earth . . .That is, the ordinary and perpetual instruments of spiritual grace, peace and light in my Church, which God by his only power preserved in this Temple. See (Zechariah 4:3).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
A somewhat collective expression of the Church as the singular witness is given in [[Matthew Henry]]'s Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible;<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/MatthewHenryComplete/mhc-com.cgi?book=re&chapter=011|title=Bible;}}</ref> Revelation 11:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
It is a sufficient number; for in the mouth of two witnesses every cause shall be established. Christ sent out his disciples two by two, to preach the gospel. Some think these two witnesses are Enoch and Elias, who are to return to the earth for a time: others, the church of the believing Jews and that of the Gentiles: it should rather seem that they are God's eminent faithful ministers, who shall not only continue to profess the Christian religion, but to preach it, in the worst of times. II. The time of their prophesying, or bearing their testimony for Christ. A thousand two hundred and threescore days; that is (as many think), to the period of the reign of antichrist; and, if the beginning of that interval could be ascertained, this number of prophetic days, taking a day for a year, would give us a prospect when the end shall be. III.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
[[John Wesley]] in his commentary on Revelation 11<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/WesleysExplanatoryNotes/wes.cgi?book=re&chapter=011|title=Revelation 11}}</ref> suggests a more "spiritual" application of their identity - almost ambiguous in nature:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
11:3 And I - Christ - will give to my two witnesses - These seem to be two prophets; two select, eminent instruments. Some have supposed (though without foundation) that they are Moses and Elijah, whom they resemble in several respects. To prophesy twelve hundred and sixty days - Common days, that is, an hundred and eighty weeks. So long will they prophesy, (even while that last and sharp treading of the holy city continues,) both by word and deed, witnessing that Jesus is the Son of God, the heir of all things, and exhorting all men to repent, and fear, and glorify God. Clothed in sackcloth - The habit of the deepest mourners, out of sorrow and concern for the people. 11:4 These are the two olive trees - That is, as Zerubbabel and Joshua, the two olive trees spoken of by Zechariah, Zechariah 3:9, 4:10, were then the two chosen instruments in God's hand, even so shall these. be in their season. Being themselves full of the unction of the Holy One, they shall continually transmit the same to others also. And the two candlesticks - Burning and shining lights. Standing before the Lord of the earth - Always waiting on God, without the help of man, and asserting his right over the earth and all things therein.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
John Gill's ''Exposition of the Bible''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GillsExpositionoftheBible/gil.cgi?book=re&chapter=011&verse=003&next=004&prev=002|title=Bible}}</ref> presents a classical Protestant Historicist interpretation of the two witnesses as the true Church in counter distinction to the ''antichrist'' system of Roman Catholicism:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Though they ought not to be considered exclusive of other ministers and churches, who also have bore, and still do bear a witness for Christ, and against the idolatries of the church of Rome: no two individual persons can be meant, since these witnesses were to prophesy 1260 days, that is, so many years, but a succession of ministers and churches.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Ross Taylor's "Verse by Verse Commentary on Revelation"<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.apocalipsis.org/rev-11.htm|title=Revelation"}}</ref> clearly defines the Church as the "two olive trees and the two lampstands" . . .<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The two witnesses represent the witnessing church rather than two individuals: 1. The church received power to witness at Pentecost, see verse 3 'I will give power to my two witnesses and they will prophecy...' cf. Acts 1:8 and 2:18. 2. Two is the number to establish a witness, testimony (Deu 17:6, John 8:17, 2 Cor 13:1), for example our Lord sent his disciple out in twos, Mark 6:7. 3. They are described as 'the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth' 11:4. We have already seen that the church is symbolised by lampstands in 1:20. The olive trees represent the power of the Holy Spirit with which the witnesses had received (Acts 1:5, 1:8, 2:17). 4. They prophecy for the same period (1,260 days) as the worshippers, temple of God and holy city is trampled on by the Gentiles (42 months). These three designations are all indicative of the church. 5. They rise from the dead and are raptured as is the church (11:11-12). 6. 11:7 indicates that '...the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them' i.e. the two witnesses this parallels the warning in 13:7 that the beast 'was given power to make war against the saints and to conquer them' see also the warning in 13:10. If the two events are indeed parallel then the two witnesses are the saints.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Furthermore, the elimination of all or part of the 70th Week of Daniel (yet future) is the hallmark of Historicist eschatology—there is no personal Antichrist, peace treaty to be signed with Israel, a future rebuilt Jewish temple, or future 70th week.{{Fact|date=July 2008}}<br />
<br />
===An Amillennial Exposition of Revelation 11:1-13===<br />
<br />
An Amillennial exposition of Revelation 11:1-13 is available at this link.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/files/show_article.php?id=153 |title=Nollie Malabuyo, "The Two Faithful Witnesses" |date=[[2005]]-[[03-22]] |work=TwoAgesPilgrims.com}}</ref> You can also read an exegesis of the passage in [http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/files/show_article.php?id=157/ "Will Moses and Elijah Come Back? The Two Witnesses of Revelation 11:1-13"]<br />
<br />
===Individuals===<br />
<br />
The identity and worldwide notoriety of the Two Witnesses as singular individuals is held by numerous Biblical literalists – a few of their quotations will confirm their commentary . . .<br />
<br />
Dr. Thomas L. Constable of Dallas Theological Seminary on his studies of Revelation (''Notes on Revelation'', 2007 Edition) provides a dispensationalist interpretation of the two witnesses as two "new individuals" to arrive on the prophetic scene yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Even though believing Jews will suffer persecution at this time, God will still get His message out. Two witnesses will be especially significant at this time. Valid testimony required two witnesses under the Old Covenant (Deut. 19:15), and both Jesus and the early church sent out emissaries in pairs (Mark 6:7; Luke 10:2; Acts 13:2; 15:39-40). Revelation 11:3 Who is speaking in this verse? The speaker seems to be the angel who spoke in verses 1-2, who here speaks for God (cf. v. 8). God did not reveal the identity of the two witnesses. Many commentators believe they will be Moses and Elijah since these men were prophets and performed the kinds of miracles these witnesses will perform (v. 6). Others believe they will be Enoch and Elijah since God took these men to heaven without dying. Another reason some believe one of these witnesses will be Elijah is Malachi 4:5, which predicts that Elijah will return before Messiah. Other less literal interpreters think the two witnesses may represent not two individuals but the faithful witness of the church throughout its persecutions. I agree with those who believe that they will be individuals living at this time rather than former prophets brought back to earth for this ministry (cf. Matt. 11:14).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://soniclight.com/constable/notes/pdf/revelation.pdf |title=Notes on<br />
Revelation: 2007 Edition |accessdate=2007-08-28 |last=Constable |first=Thomas L. |year=2007 |format=PDF |publisher=Sonic Light |pages=98 }}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
J. Dwight Pentecost's ''Things to Come'' (also of dispensationalist - Dallas Theological Seminary) concludes:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
It would seem best to conclude that the identity of these men is uncertain. They, in all probability, are not men who lived before and have been restored, but are two men raised up as a special witness, to whom sign-working power is given. their ministry is one of judgment, as their sackcloth clothing indicates.<ref>{{cite book |last=Pentecost |first=J. Dwight |title=Things to Come |year=1962 |publisher=Dunham Publishing Company |location=Findlay, Ohio |page=308}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Paul D. Feinberg<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.foutz.net/archives/people/paul_d_feinberg_phd_in_memorium_february_21_2004.shtml|title=Paul D. Feinberg)}}</ref> in ''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.amazon.com/Three-Views-Rapture-Pre-Post-Tribulation/dp/0310212952|title=''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation''}}</ref> defends the Pre-Tribulational Rapture position and interprets the two witnesses as follows:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
"The two witnesses appear to be individuals rather than representatives of all living and dead saints. The witnesses perform miracles; they testify. These actions are usually done by individuals, not groups. Moreover, both witnesses are killed by the Beast. If they are symbolic of all saints, then it seems as if all saints will be martyred before the Rapture. Further, it also appears that all saints will have men gaze at their dead bodies and desecrate them." (''Three Views on the Rapture - Pre-, Mid-,or Post Tribulation'', Stanley N. Gundry, Gleason L. Archer Jr., Zondervan, Grand Rapids, 1996, p. 148)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Those adhering to the "individual theory" of the two witnesses point out that these are truly awesome figures. They are similar to [[Moses]] and [[Aaron]] or [[Elijah]] and [[Elisha]] - both sets wrought indisputable havoc upon their audiences (Egypt and [[Apostasy|Apostate]] Israel) and "nothing could harm them." Therefore, could not individuals be raised up in the "end of days" and do such world-wide miracles? Could they not prevail as Moses and Elijah did before the masses? Furthermore, "their dead body" (singular) does not signify any "corporate nature" of their identity--to the contrary, it simply means the visibility of a dead body in the street of Jerusalem for 3 1/2 days (not years). Their resurrection is peculiar to them only--and does not connote the ''Resurrection of the just'' nor the rapture, for the rapture of the Church (according to pretribulationists) takes place at the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
<br />
The "great city" mentioned in Revelation 11 is not the great city found elsewhere in the Revelation<ref>{{cite web |url=http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Bible.show/sVerseID/30881/eVerseID/30881 |title=Forerunner Commentary |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=Ritenbaugh |first=John W. |year=2008 |work=BibleTools |publisher=Church of the Great God}}</ref>; and the "holy city" trampled under foot is physical Jerusalem,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn32/jerusalem.htm |title=Jerusalem: Focus of Biblical Prophecy |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=McNeely |first=Darris |year=2001 |month=January/February |work=The Good News |publisher=United Church of God}}</ref> not the two witnesses. Likewise, the "temple" which is measured is the physical rebuilt temple<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.raptureready.com/featured/price/7rp.html |title=An Overview of the Future Temples |accessdate=2008-01-27 |last=Price |first=Randall |work=Rapture Ready}}</ref> in Jerusalem, not the two witnesses.<br />
<br />
The late Dr. John Walvoord, president of Dallas Theological Seminary, in his ''Every Prophecy of the Bible''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.armageddonbooks.com/walvoord.html|title=''Every Prophecy of the Bible''}}</ref> repeats the classical dispensational, pre-tribulational, literalist interpretation of the two witnesses . . . excerpts from his text:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In the Great Tribulation the temple has already been desecrated, sacrifices stopped, and the worship of the world ruler installed instead (Dan. 9:27; 12:11-12; Matt. 24:15; 2 Thes. 2:4; Rev. 13:14-15). Measuring the temple will indicate the apostasy of the nation of Israel and their need for revival and restoration. The Holy City, Jerusalem, according to the Scripture, will be trampled underfoot of Gentiles for the final forty-two months preceding the Second Coming. This has actually been true ever since 600 B.C. because from then to the time of the Great Tribulation, Israel never was in full possession of their holy places except by Gentile tolerance and permission. This is still true today as Israel could not retain its independence without the help of the United States. The forty-two months, however, refer to the Great Tribulation as a time when the holy place in the temple will be desecrated especially, and the Great Tribulation will run its course, climaxing in the second coming of Christ (13:5). Though there have been brief periods in the history of Israel when Israel temporarily retained control of the holy place, it will never be permanently theirs until the second coming of Christ. John was then introduced to those who were called 'two witnesses' who will be prophets in the end time. Their prophecy will cover 1,260 days, or forty-two months, the same length of time that the world ruler will possess the temple and turn it into a religious center for the worship of himself . . . the reference to the two witnesses as being symbolized by the two olive trees and the two lampstands probably has reference to Zechariah 4 where the lampstand and two trees are discussed. The meaning of this to Zerubbabel, who was one of the important leaders in Israel in Zechariah's time, was that their witness was empowered by the oil from the olive tree, symbolic of being empowered by the Holy Spirit (Zech. 4:1-14). In view of the fact that the Bible does not indicate who they are, it is probably safe to recognize them as two witnesses who will appear in the end time who are not related to any previous historical character.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Some claim that the two are "Jewish evangelists" who "evangelize Israel" while the 144000 of Revelation 7 "evangelize the rest of the world" during the 70th Week of Daniel.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Who are they? We're not told, so we can't be certain, yet we know that . . . - ''Witness'' in Greek is ''martus'' (''martyr''). In Rev. 12:11 OT Israeli allusions are used, not NT Church figures like Peter or Paul. These two evangelize Israel; while the 144,000 evangelize the rest of the world! They possibly represent the OT Law and Prophets (Matt 22:36-40). Possibly Elijah (Representing the Prophets). Possibly Moses (Representing the Law).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.soulcare.org/Bible%20Studies/Revelation/Revelation11_Witnesses.htm |title=Revelation 11 Consequences of Christ: The Two Witnesses Mercy-Grace |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Galloway |first=Sid |date=2001-03-18 |work=The Bible: One Bite at a Time}}</ref></blockquote><br />
<br />
The [[Eastern Orthodox Church]] teaches that the Two Witnesses will be [[Enoch]] and Elias (the two individuals who entered bodily into heaven), who will be sent back to earth to preach during the Great Tribulation, and they will be the last [[martyr]]s before the [[Second Coming]]. <br />
<br />
Biblical literalists have incorporated the developments in electronic communications systems with the interpretations of the scripture: "And they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves" (Revelation 11:9). During the close of the nineteenth century, Ethelbert William Bullinger indicated electronics inventiveness would facilitate the literal fulfillment of this prophecy through the following statement and its footnote:<ref>Bullinger, E. W. (1984). ''Commentary on Revelation'' [[p. 365]]. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications. ISBN 0-8254-2289-2. According to the [[printers key]], the second printing of this work was in 1889.</ref><br />
<br />
:The older commentators might have felt a difficulty in understanding how the whole earth could rejoice at an event happening at Jerusalem. But in these days of electric inventions, telephones, and wireless telegraphy, we all know how the next day the whole world sympathises and rejoices together.<br />
::Witness the death of Queen Victoria; the murder of President M’Kinley; or the American Yacht Race – all the stages of the latter were known the world over within a few minutes of the passing events.<br />
<br />
During the 1930s, when [[television]] became commercially available, Knoch stated that invention merely needed to be developed further for the literal fulfillment of the above scripture.<ref>Knoch, A. E. (1935). ''The Unveiling of Jesus Christ'' [p. 319]. Saugus, CA: Concordant Publishing Concern.</ref> Two years after the launch of [[Sputnik]], Bloomfield said the events of Revelation 11:9 would be covered by “some kind of television.”<ref> Bloomfield, A. E. (2002). ''The Key to Understanding Revelation'' [p.200]. Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers. ISBN 0-7642-2593-6. Originally published 1959</ref> In 1962, the first satellite to relay a television signal from Europe to North America was Telstar. [[Hal Lindsey]] referred to that specific communication system in his explanation.<ref>Lindsey, H. (1977). ''There’s A New World Coming'' [p. 151]. New York, NY: Bantam Books, Incorporated. ISBN 0-553-10832-8. Originally published by Vision House Publishers in 1973.</ref> By 1999, John F. Walvoord,<ref>Walvoord, J. F. (1999). ''Every Prophecy of the Bible'' [p. 574]. Colorado Springs, CO: Chariot Victor Publishing. ISBN 1-56476-758-2. Formerly titled ''The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook'' (1990).</ref> Tim LaHaye,<ref>LaHaye, T. F. (1999). ''Revelation Unveiled'' [p. 188]. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. ISBN 0-310-23005-5.</ref> and Grant Jeffrey,<ref>Jeffrey, G. R. (1999). ''The Signature of God The Handwriting of God'' [p. 194]. New York, NY: Inspirational Press. ISBN 0-88486-255-0.</ref> leading proponents of the literalist view and authors of best sellers, had explained Revelation 11:9 in terms of literal fulfillments through some form of worldwide satellite television system.<br />
<br />
Finally, perhaps they are archangels.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/snotes/note1204.html |title=The Two Witnesses |accessdate=2007-12-25 |last=Loughran |first=David B |year=1999 |work=Sermon Notes |publisher=Stewarton Bible School}}</ref><br />
<br />
==See also==<br />
<br />
*[[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
*[[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
*[[Antichrist]]<br />
*[[Apocalypse]]<br />
*[[Armageddon]]<br />
*[[Book of Daniel]]<br />
*[[Book of Revelation]]<br />
*[[Eschatology]]<br />
*[[End times]]<br />
*[[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
*[[Last Judgment]]<br />
*[[Millenarianism]]<br />
*[[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
*[[Preterism]]<br />
*[[Postmillennialism]]<br />
*[[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
*[[Third Temple]]<br />
*[[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
==Definitions==<br />
<br />
*Historicism(Christian eschatology) - Historicism is an eschatological system of prophetic interpretation derived from the Protestant Reformation and holds that the prophecies of the Bible have taken place throughout history (many have been fulfilled) - some still will be fulfilled.<br />
*Futurism (Christian eschatology) - Biblical Futurism asserts that most of the relevant prophetic themes of Christian and Hebrew Scripture are yet future - the "end times" prophecies are mainly found outside the immediate time frame but could unravel any time - most hold to a literal, physical, apocalyptic and global view of Bible prophecies.<br />
*[[Preterism]] - A variant of Christian eschatology which holds that some or all of the biblical prophecies concerning the Last Days (or End Times) refer to events which actually happened in the first century after Christ's birth.<br />
*Partial Preterism - A form of Christian eschatology that holds much in common with but is distinct from Full preterism (or 'consistent' or 'hyper' preterism) in that it places the events of most of the Book of Revelation as occurring during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD (and/or the Fall of Rome several centuries later) yet still affirms an orthodox future bodily return of Christ to earth at an unknown day and hour.<br />
*Idealism (Christian eschatology) - Idealism (also called the 'Spiritual view') in Christian eschatology is an interpretation of the Book of Revelation that sees all of the imagery of the book as non-literal symbols which are perpetually and cyclically fulfilled in a spiritual sense during the conflict between the Kingdom of God and the forces of Satan throughout the time from the first advent to the Second Coming of Christ.<br />
*Millennialism - Millennialism (or chiliasm), from millennium, which literally means "thousand years", is primarily a belief expressed in some Christian denominations, and literature, that there will be a Golden Age or Paradise on Earth where "Christ will reign" prior to the final judgment and future eternal state, primarily derived from the book of Revelation 20:1-6. Millennialism as such is a specific form of Millenarianism.<br />
*[[Postmillennialism]] - In Christian eschatology, postmillennialism is an interpretation of chapter 20 of the Book of Revelation which sees Christ's second coming as occurring after or post- the thousand year "millennium".<br />
*[[Premillennialism]] - Christian eschatology which holds the belief that Christ will literally reign on the earth for 1,000 years at his second coming. The doctrine is called premillennialism because it views the current age as prior to Christ's kingdom. It is distinct from other forms of eschatology such as amillennialism, postmillennialism, and preterism which view the kingdom as figurative and non-temporal, or as currently occurring in history before Christ's coming. Premillennialism is largely based upon a literal interpretation of Revelation 20:1-6 in the New Testament which describes Christ's coming to the earth and subsequent reign at the end of an apocalyptic period of tribulation. It views this future age as a time of fulfillment for the prophetic hope of God's people as given in the Old Testament.<br />
*Amillennialism -Amillennialism (from the Latin prefix meaning "no", ''mille'', meaning "thousand", and ''annum'' meaning "year") is a view in Christian eschatology named for its denial of a future, thousand-year, physical reign of Jesus Christ on the earth, as espoused in the premillennial and some postmillennial views of the Book of Revelation, chapter 20.<br />
*[[Tribulation|The Tribulation]] - The Tribulation (or "Great Tribulation") is an event referred to in the New Testament of the Bible at Matthew 24:21 ("For then shall be great tribulation..." - King James Version) and other passages. In the futurist view of Christian eschatology, the Tribulation is a relatively short period of time where believers will experience worldwide persecution and be purified and strengthened by it.<br />
*[[Rapture]] - The rapture (''harpazo'' in Greek in 1 Thessalonians 4:17) is the common description of the event in Christian eschatology in which Christians will be "taken" or "caught up" from Earth to Heaven to be with Jesus Christ.<br />
*Post Tribulation Rapture - This doctrine holds that there is a Resurrection-Rapture of living believers in Jesus Christ at the end of the age (or the "End times"). Posttribulationists believe that Christians will not be taken up into Heaven at the rapture, but will gathered by the angels to meet Christ in the air, then return with him to enter the millennium on earth.<br />
*Prewrath Rapture - The Prewrath View (also known as Mid Tribulation Raptureplaces the rapture of the Church after the mid-point of a yet future 70th Week of Daniel--i.e., after the "abomination of desolation" - also holds that a side-by-side comparison of the wording of the sixth seal (Revelation 6:12-13) and the signs in Matthew 24:29 that announce the Second Coming of Jesus and the rapture of the Church indicate that they are the same event. Therefore, the rapture described in Matthew 24:29-31 can be placed after the sixth seal of Revelation.<br />
*Thomas Ice and the Pre Tribulation Rapture - A Dispensational-Premillennarian eschatology which affirms that the believing Church will be raptured prior to the 70th Week of Daniel (i.e., before the "tribulation" or the final seven-years of this age); likewise, this eschatology sees the coming Antichrist as a real person energized by Satan who will implement a "defense pact" or "peace treaty" with Israel at the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week. Thomas Ice of the Pre-trib Research Center is an avowed proponent of this eschatology.<br />
*Dispensationalism - In Christian theology, Dispensationalism teaches biblical history as a number of successive economies or administrations, called dispensations, each of which emphasizes the continuity of the Old Testament covenants God made with His chosen people through Abraham, Moses and King David.<br />
*Hyperdispensationalism - Hyperdispensationalism (or sometimes ultra-dispensationalism), as opposed to traditional (or mainstream) Dispensationalism, views the start of the Christian church as beginning with the ministry of the Apostle Paul after the early part of the book of Acts. Hyperdispensationalists regard the failure of the post-Apostolic church to preserve the Pauline Distinctive as a cause of the Great Apostasy and as a mistake of the 19th Century Restoration Movement. Hyperdispensationalists regard what they understand to be the recovery of true Pauline Christianity as the crowning achievement of events that began with the Protestant Reformation.<br />
*Progressive Dispensationalism - Progressive Dispensationalism is one of two views in mainstream dispensationalism, the other being the traditional view. The major difference between the traditional and progressive dispensationalist views concerns the relationship between the dispensations. Traditional dispensationalists perceive the present age of grace as an "intercalation" or parenthesis in God's plan, and therefore is unrelated to the past and future dispensations. However, progressive dispensationalists reject this idea of a parenthesis, and perceive the present age of grace as a key link or progression in relation with the past and future dispensations.<br />
*[[Eschatology]] - Eschatology (from the Greek ἔσχατος, ''eschatos'' meaning "last" + ology) is a part of theology and philosophy concerned with the final events in the history of the world or the ultimate destiny of mankind, commonly phrased as the end of the world. In many religions, the end of the world is a future event prophesied in sacred texts or folklore. More broadly, eschatology may encompass related concepts such as the Messiah or Messianic Age, the afterlife, and the soul.<br />
*Roman Catholic Eschatology - The Roman Catholic Church affirms the Amillennialism or Amillennarian worldview. Amillennialism was taught by St. Augustine in the fourth century and was a widely held view among Christians throughout Church history. Origen's idealizing tendency to consider only the spiritual as real (which was fundamental to his entire system) led him to combat the "rude" or "crude" aspects of a literal 1,000-year Messianic Kingdom yet future. Amillennialism has been widely held in the Eastern Orthodox Church as well, which generally follows Augustine on this point and which has deemed that Premillennialism cannot be safety taught. Amillennialism is also often associated with Protestants such as those in the Lutheran, Reformed and Anglican churches. (Please see Amillennialism).<br />
*Seventh-Day Adventist Eschatology - The Seventh-day Adventist church holds a unique system of eschatological (or end-times) beliefs. Adventist eschatology is characterized principally by the premillennial second coming of Jesus Christ. Seventh-day Adventism derives its eschatological teachings in large part from its interpretation of the books of Daniel and Revelation, as well as the teachings of Jesus Christ found in Matthew chapter 24. Adventists have traditionally interpreted biblical prophecies using the historicist method, although some of the prophecies of Revelation are thought have a future application. It is this futurist aspect of the church's interpretation of the book of Revelation that has played a major part in shaping Adventist eschatology.<br />
*Mormon Eschatology - In Mormonism, all Latter Day Saints are viewed as covenant, or chosen, people; they have accepted the name of Jesus Christ. Latter Day Saints do not dispute the "chosen" status of the Jewish people. In LDS doctrine all people who have ever lived will have the ability to enter into this covenant during the Millennium (yet future). Mormon eschatology holds that Jews, as a chosen people, will ultimately accept Christianity (See Jeremiah 31:31-34). Mormon doctrine teaches that Mormons are "The kin blood of the Jews." Every practicing LDS member receives a patriarchal blessing that reveals their linage in the House of Israel. This lineage may be blood related or through "adoption;" therefore, a child may not necessarily share the lineage of her parents (but will still be a member of the tribes of Israel). It is a widely held belief that most members of the faith are in the tribe of Ephraim or the tribe of Manasseh.<br />
*Jehovah's Witnesses Eschatology - The eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses is central to their religious beliefs. They believe that Jesus Christ has been ruling as king since 1914, and that after that time a short period of cleansing has begun taking place. They further believe that from 1919, Jehovah's Witnesses were selected by God to be his people. Jehovah's Witnesses believe 1918 to be the time when Christ Jesus judged all world religions. They teach that after a period of 18 months, among all groups and religions, there was found only one that was humbly doing the will of Christ. Jehovah's Witnesses claim the "Bible Students" who later became known as "Jehovah's Witnesses" in 1931 (See History of Jehovah's Witnesses) are that one unique group.<br />
*British Israelism Eschatology - Teaches that the Anglo-Saxon race are the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel; therefore, many of the prophecies pointing toward "Jewish fulfillment" are really fulfilled in the Lost Tribes. It holds, however, many of the eschatological affirmations of the Seventh-Day Adventists.<br />
*Supersessionism - Supersessionism (sometimes referred to as replacement theology by its critics) is a belief that Christianity is the fulfillment and continuation of the Old Testament, and that Jews who deny that Jesus is the Messiah are not being faithful to the revelation that God has given them, and they therefore fall short of their calling as his chosen people. This view holds that racial and ethnic divisions and boundaries are ended in Jesus Christ, and faith in Jesus unites all peoples into one new body, which is God's chosen people.<br />
*[[Messianic Judaism]] - Messianic Judaism is a religion centered on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, who is referred to as Yeshua by its adherents.<br />
*[[Apologetics]] - The field of study concerned with the systematic defense of a position.<br />
*[[Exegesis]] - The extensive and critical interpretation of a text, especially of a holy scripture<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
<br />
===Relevant Biblical texts===<br />
*[[Book of Revelation|Revelation 10, 11, 12, 13, 16-21]]<br />
*[[Genesis|Genesis 37, 39-50]]<br />
*[[Book of Daniel|Daniel 7-12]]<br />
*{{bibleverse||Zechariah|3-7|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Zechariah|10-14|NKJV}}<br />
*[[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew 24]]<br />
*[[Gospel of Luke|Luke 17:20-37; 21]]<br />
*[[Epistle to the Romans|Romans 9-11]]<br />
*{{bibleverse|I|Corinthians|15:50-58|NKJV}}<br />
*{{bibleverse|I|Thessalonians|4:13-5:15|NKJV}}<br />
*{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:1-12|NKJV}}<br />
<br />
===Suggested book list===<br />
*Alnor, William M., ''Soothsayers of the Second Advent.'' Fleming H. Revell, 1989. ISBN 0-8007-5324-0<br />
*Barnhouse, Donald Grey, ''Revelation - An Expositional Commentary.'' Zondervan, 1971. ISBN 0-310-20491-7<br />
*Boston, Robert, ''Close Encounters with the Religious Right.'' Prometheus Books, 2000. ISBN 1-57392-797-X<br />
*Brog, David, ''Standing With Israel.'' Front Line, A Strang Company, 2006. ISBN 1-59185-906-9<br />
*Clarkson, Frederick, ''Eternal Hostility.'' Common Courage Press, 1997. ISBN 1-56751-088-4<br />
*Coombes, R. A., ''America, The Babylon - America's Destiny Foretold in Biblical Prophecy'' A Real Book, 1998. ISBN 1-890622-33-8<br />
*Culver, Robert Duncan, ''Daniel and the Latter Days''. Fleming H. Revell Company, 1954. {{LCCN|54|00|5434}}<br />
*Dyer, Charles H., ''The Rise of Babylon.'' Moody Publishers, 2003. ISBN 0-8024-0905-9<br />
*Feinberg, Charles L., ''Millennialism - Two Major Views''. Moody Press, 1980. ISBN 0-8024-6815-2<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''The Church and the Tribulation.'' Zondervan, 1973. ISBN 0-310-25401-9<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''First the Antichrist.'' Baker Books, May 1997. ISBN 0-8010-5764-7<br />
*Gundry, Stanley N.; Archer, Gleason L., Jr., ''Three Views on The Rapture - Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulation.'' Zondervan, 1996. ISBN 0-310-21298-7<br />
*Hitchcock, Mark, ''Is America in Bible Prophecy?.'' Multnomah Publishers, 2002. ISBN 1-57673496-X<br />
*Hunt, Dave, ''A Cup of Trembling - Jerusalem and Bible Prophecy.'' Harvest House Publishers, 1995. ISBN 1-56507-334-7<br />
*Ironside, Harry A., ''Revelation.'' Loizeaux Brothers, 1982. ISBN 0-87213-384-2<br />
*Jeffrey, Grant R., ''Armageddon - Appointment with Destiny.'' Bantam Books, 1990. ISBN 0-553-28537-8<br />
*Juster, Dan; Intrater, Keith, ''Israel, the Church and the Last Days.'' Destiny Image Publishers, 1991. ISBN 1-56043-061-3<br />
*Krieger, Doug, ''Unsealing the End of Days: The Visions and Prophecy of Zechariah.''<ref>{{cite web |url=http://http://www.the-tribulation network.com/dougkrieger/unsealing/unsealing_by_chapter.htm|title=Unsealing the End of Days: The Visions and Prophecy of Zechariah}}</ref> (date, 2004-08-30)<br />
*Ladd, George Eldon, ''"A Commentary on the Revelation of John".'' William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972. ISBN 0-8028-1684-3<br />
*Ladd, George Eldon, ''"The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of The Second Advent and the Rapture."'' Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1956. ISBN 0-8028-1111-6<br />
*Lalonde, Peter & Patti, ''"Left Behind".'' Harvest House Publishers, 1995. ISBN 0-9636407-3-9<br />
*LaSor, William Sanford, ''"The Truth About Armageddon".'' Harper & Row, 1982. ISBN 0-06-064919-4<br />
*Lindsey, Hal, ''"Planet Earth - 2000 A.D."'' Western Front, Ltd., 1994. ISBN 0-9641058-0-2<br />
*Linker, Damon, ''"The Theocons".'' Doubleday, 2006. ISBN 978-0-385-51647-1<br />
*Paterson, Stella, ''"Calling Forth The Remnant By Way of the Cross".'' Preparing The Way Publishers, 2006. ISBN 1-929451-21-0<br />
*Pentecost, J. Dwight, ''"Things To Come".'' Dunham Publishing Company, 1962.<br />
*Perry, Richard H., ''"Of the Last Days: Listen, I Tell You a Mystery".'' Essence Publishing (Canada), July 2003. ISBN 1-55306-595-6<br />
*Pink, Arthur W., ''"The Antichrist".'' Kregel Publications, 1988. ISBN0-8254-3539-0<br />
*Rausch, David A., ''"Zionism Within Early American Fundamentalism 1878-1918 - A Convergence of Two Traditions".'' The Edwin Mellen Press, 1979. ISBN 0-88946-875-3<br />
*Ryrie, Charles Caldwell, ''"Dispensationalism Today".'' Moody Press, 1965. ISBN 0-8024-2256-X<br />
*Shearer, S. R. (Steve), ''"The Beginning of the End".'' End of the Age Ministries, 1985. {{LCCN|85|00|81941}}<br />
*Spargimino, Larry, ''"The Anti-Prophets - The Challenge of Preterism".'' Hearthstone Publishing, 2000. ISBN 1-57558-080-2<br />
*Sutton, William Josiah, ''"Ancient Prophecies About the Dragon, The Beast, and the False Prophet".'' The Institute of Religious Knowledge, 1999. ISBN 0-917013-02-6<br />
*Sutton, William Josiah, ''"The Antichrist 666".'' Teach Services, Inc., 1995. ISBN 1-57258-015-1<br />
*Walvoord, John F., ''"Every Prophecy of the Bible".'' Chariot Victory Publishing, 1999. ISBN 0-7394-0215-3<br />
*Walvoord, John F., ''"The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook". '' Victor Books, 1977. ISBN 0-89693-509-4<br />
*Gundry, Robert, ''"The Church and the Tribulation".'' Zondervan, 1973. ISBN 0-310-25401-9<br />
*Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania - "''Revelation - Its Grand Climax At Hand!".'' Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., 1988.<br />
*White, E. G., ''"America in Prophecy".'' Inspiration Books East, Inc., 1888. ISBN 0-916547-04-3<br />
*Woodrow, Ralph, ''"His Truth is Marching On -Advanced Studies on Prophecy in the Light of History".'' Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Assn., Inc., 1996 Edition. ISBN 0-916938-03-04<br />
<br />
==Notes and references==<br />
{{reflist|3}}</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645771Antichrist2009-03-28T23:20:37Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* See Also */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as [[Dajjal]].<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<References/><br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457692300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T23:19:43Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |author=Taze Russell| publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author=Jason Wallace| publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''| publisher=<br />
The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=645768Abomination of Desolation2009-03-28T23:17:36Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks{{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}. Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9;27; Daniel 11:31; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast''' (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) <br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=645766Abomination of Desolation2009-03-28T23:11:54Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks{{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}. Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9;27; Daniel 112:13; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast'''t (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) <br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Abomination_of_Desolation&diff=645765Abomination of Desolation2009-03-28T23:11:00Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Abomination of Desolation''' is a Biblical term for a specific act: the desecration of the Jewish temple via the setting up of an image of a pagan god inside the sanctuary, followed by the sacrifice of a sow or other animal considered unclean. This act occurred only once in the historical record, when [[Antiochus IV Epiphanes]] profaned the [[Second Temple]], sparking the Maccabean Revolt.<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
The Hebrew root for abomination is שׁקץ, ''shākac'', “to be filthy,” “to loathe,” “to abhor,” from which is derived שׁקּץ or שׁקּוּץ, ''shikkuc'' or ''shikkūc'', “filthy,” especially “idolatrous.” This word is used to describe specific forms of idolatrous worship that were especially abhorrent, as that of the Ammonites and the Moabites (1 Kings 11:5-7; 2 Kings 23:13). When Daniel undertook to specify an abomination so surpassingly disgusting to the sense of morality and decency, and so aggressive against everything that was godly as to drive all from its presence and leave its abode desolate, he chose this term as the strongest among the several synonyms, adding the qualification “that maketh desolate” (Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The same noun, though in the plural, occurs in Deuteronomy 29:17; 2 Kings 23:24; Isaiah 66:3; Jeremiah 4:1, 7:30, 13:27, and 32:34; Ezekiel 20:7-8 and 20:30; Daniel 9:27; Hosea 9:10; and Zechariah 9:7. The New Testament equivalent of the noun is ''βδέλυγμα, bdél-ug-ma'' = “detestable,” i.e. (specially) “idolatrous.” Alluding to Daniel, Christ spoke of the “abomination of desolation” in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.<br />
<br />
==Historical Background==<br />
Since the invasion of the [[Assyria]]ns and Chaldeans, the Jewish people had been without political independence. From the Chaldeans the rulership of Judea had been transferred to the Persians, and from the Persians, after an interval of 200 years, to [[Alexander the Great]]. From the beginning of the [[Persia]]n sovereignty the Jews had been permitted to renew their religious and political commonwealth, thus establishing a state under the rulership of priests, for the high priest was not only the highest functionary of Judaism, but also the chief magistrate in so far as these prerogatives were not exercised by the king of the conquering nation. Ezra had given a new significance to the Tōrāh by having it read to the whole congregation of Israel and by his vigorous enforcement of the law of separation from the Gentiles. His emphasis of the law introduced the period of legalism and finical interpretation of the letter which called forth some of the bitterest invectives of our Saviour (Mathew 23). Specialists of the law known as “scribes” devoted themselves to its study and subtle interpretation, and the pious beheld the highest moral accomplishment in the extremely conscientious observance of every precept. But in opposition to this class, there were those who, influenced by the Hellenistic culture, introduced by the conquests of Alexander the Great, were inclined to a more “liberal” policy. Thus, two opposing parties were developed: the Hellenistic, and the party of the Pious, or the Chasidim, ''hăsīdhīm'' (Hasidaeans, 1 Maccabes 2:42; 7:13), who held fast to the strict ideal of the scribes. The former gradually came into ascendancy. Judea was rapidly becoming Hellenistic in all phases of its political, social and religious life, and the “Pious” were dwindling to a small minority sect. This was the situation when Antiochus IV Epiphanes set out to suppress the last vestige of the Jewish religion by the application of brute force.<br />
<br />
===Antiochus Epiphanes===<br />
Antiochus IV, son of Antiochus the Great, became the successor of his brother, Seleucus IV, who had been murdered by his minister, Heliodorus, as king of Syria (175-164 B.C.). He was by nature a despot; eccentric and unreliable; sometimes a spendthrift, fraternizing in an affected manner with those of lower station; sometimes cruel and tyrannical, as witness his aggressions against Judea. Polybius (26 10) tells us that his eccentric ideas caused some to speak of him as a man of pure motive and humble character, while others hinted at insanity. The epithet ''Epiphanes'' is an abbreviation of ''theós epīphanes'', which is the designation given himself by Antiochus on his coins, and means “the god who appears or reveals himself.” Egyptian writers translate the inscription, “God which comes forth,” namely, like the burning sun (Horos or Helios) on the horizon, thus identifying the king with the triumphal, appearing god. When Antiochus Epiphanes arose to the throne, Onias III, as high priest, was the leader of the old orthodox party in Judea; the head of the Hellenists was his own brother Jesus, a man who preferred to designate himself by the Greek name Jason, indicating the trend of his mind. Jason promised the king large sums of money for the transfer of the office of high priest from his brother to himself and the privilege of erecting a gymnasium and a temple to Phallus, and for the granting of the privilege “to enroll the inhabitants of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.” Antiochus gladly agreed to everything. Onias was removed, Jason became high priest, and henceforth the process of Hellenizing Judea was pushed energetically. The Jewish religion was not attacked, but the “legal institutions were set aside, and illegal practices were introduced” (2 Maccabees 4:11). A gymnasium was erected outside the castle; the youth of Jerusalem exercised themselves in the gymnastic art of the Greeks, and even priests left their services at the altar to take part in the contest of the palaestra. The disregard of Jewish custom went so far that many artificially removed the traces of circumcision from their bodies, and with characteristic liberality, Jason even sent a contribution to the sacrifices in honor of Heracles on the occasion of the quadrennial festivities in Tyre.<br />
<br />
===Suppression of the Jewish Religion===<br />
Under these conditions it is not surprising that Antiochus should have had both the inclination and the courage to undertake the total eradication of the Jewish religion and the establishment of Greek polytheism in its stead. The observance of all Jewish laws, especially those relating to the Sabbath and to circumcision, were forbidden under pain of death. The Jewish religion was set aside, and in all cities of Judea, sacrifices were ordered to be brought to the pagan deities, with representatives of the crown everywhere enforcing the edict. Once a month a search was instituted, and whoever had secreted a copy of the Law or had observed the rite of circumcision was condemned to death. In Jerusalem on the 15th of Chislev of the year 145 aet Sel, (December, 168 B.C.) a pagan altar was built on the Great Altar of Burnt Sacrifices in front of the Temple, and on the 25th of Chislev, sacrifice was brought on this altar for the first time (1 Maccabees 1:54, 59). This evidently was the “abomination of desolation.” The sacrifice, according to 2 Maccabees, was brought to the Olympian Zeus, to whom the temple of Jerusalem had been re-dedicated. This act of Antiochus was considered so revolting that Mattathias, a former priest of the course of Joarib (1 Chronicles 24:7), overthrew the pagan altar and summoned any who would follow him to drive away the pagan deities, leading to the revolt under Judas the Maccabee.<br />
<br />
==Future or Futurism Christian Eschatology==<br />
In Matthew 24:15, Christ told His disciples that during the last days, those who would see the abomination of desolation as spoken by Daniel the prophet needed to flee to the mountains. This event is to occur once again in the re-built [[Third Temple]] during the seventieth week (Daniel 9:27; 12:11) when the [[Antichrist]] breaks his seven-year covenant with Israel and erects an image to himself in the sanctuary.<br />
<br />
Much more elaborate forecasting which connects the Abomination of Desolation to both Antichrist and to the desecration of a rebuilt Third Temple is held by Futurism-style eschatologists.<br />
<br />
Some [[Evangelical]] (viz., Futurism - Christian eschatology)-interpreters of the [[End Times]] see in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}} the repeated references to the desecration of the temple under Antiochus IV Epiphanes as a prototype of the latter-days' Antichrist or ''the Beast'' - that there are two future applications: (1) The future desecration of a rebuilt Jewish [[Third Temple]] by the Antichrist known as the Abomination of Desolation (i.e., "earthly"); and (2) The desecration of the body of Antichrist {{{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-9|NKJV}}) through the incarnation of [[Satan]] wherein the parody of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ takes place (i.e., "spiritual" or "heavenly") and the Antichrist is from then on entitled ''the Beast''(See: Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-8), (Ref: the Antichrist and Whore of Babylon, i.e., ''Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth'').<br />
<br />
Futurist Christians consider the ''Abomination of Desolation'' prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in {{bibleverse||Matthew|24:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Mark|13:14|NKJV}} as referring to an event in the end time future, when a 7 year peace treaty will be signed between Israel and a world ruler called the ''Man of Sin'' or the ''Man of Lawlessness'', or the ''Antichrist'' affirmed by the writings of the [[Apostle Paul]] in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2|NKJV}}.<br />
<br />
Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work ''The Antichrist'' attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future [[Antichrist]] as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of [[the West]] (viz., the United States of America)--tracing the portions of {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-8|NKJV}} to the Beast of {{bibleverse||Revelation|11|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}}, yet to ascend from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power with the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2).<br />
<br />
Krieger claims that the title of ''Antichrist'' (found only in I John 2:22, I John 4:3 and {{bibleverse|II|John|7|NKJV}}) is given to this future figure who will parody [[Jesus Christ]] in his death and resurrection when, as the leader of the West, he will feign himself as a [[Messiah]]-like figure to both [[Jews]] and Gentiles for the first three-and-one-half years of Daniel's yet future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks{{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}. Paul states in {{bibleverse|II|Thessalonians|2:3-4|NKJV}}: "...the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." In his thesis, Krieger cites Donald Barnhouse in his commentary on Revelation (1971, Zondervan) who affirms that ''the Beast'' of Revelation is the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist and that the ''Abomination of Desolation'' is this future event. This revelation of the "man of sin" is two-fold: (1) he is assassinated in a rebuilt Jewish Temple (the so-called [[Third Temple]]) when religious Jews become outraged over his self-deification and declarations of godhood--a blatant desecration; and (2) whereupon Satan incarnates himself into Antichrist's body and feigns the resurrection (i.e., "temple" as when Jesus said: "Destroy this '''temple''', and in three days I will raise it up...he was speaking of the temple of his body" - (John 2:19-21). John the Apostle in Revelation 11:7; and Revelation 13:3 describes the Antichrist transformed into The Beast for the final half of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks: "And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast." Paul's description of the "man of sin" as the "son of perdition" in II Thessalonians 2:2-3 parallels the account when "Satan entered into Judas" {Luke 22:3; John 13:27) to commit the act of betrayal. Jesus entitled Judas as "the son of perdition" (John 17:12); therefore, the incarnation of Satan into the body of Antichrist in the middle of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks (Daniel 9:27) terminates the sacerdotal rites of the Third Temple (Daniel 8:11-14; Daniel 11:31-32; Daniel 12:11)- this is the Abomination of Desolation or ''Transgression of Desolation'' (Daniel 8:13; Daniel 9;27; Daniel 112:13; Daniel 12:11) - both the desecration of the literal Third Temple and the desecration of the Antichrist, whereupon he is entitled '''the Beast'''t (i.e., without divine capacity to fellowship with God - the "son of perdition" or "destruction" and "utter damnation"), are considered as the Abomination of Desolation (II Thessalonians 2:2).<br />
<br />
The [[typology]] of the [[Holy of Holies]] or the innermost sanctuary of the Jewish Temple is, according to many Evangelicals (especially among the [[Plymouth Brethren]]) the picture of a man's being: spirit, and soul and body (I Thessalonians 5:23) which is likened to the Jewish Temple's "outer court" (i.e., the body); the "Holy Place" (i.e., the soul) and the [[Holy of Holies]] (i.e., the spirit of a man). Jesus taught that unless a man were "born anew" he could not see the kingdom of God. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). The desecration of the Holy of Holies would be likened to the desecration of the human spirit - this is the part of man that would be entered into by [[Satan]] as Satan in {{bibleverse||Revelation|13|NKJV}} would enter into the lifeless body of the Antichrist. Once this act of interior desecration occurs, Antichrist takes the title of the Beast (Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 13:1-10). A beast, affirmed by orthodox Christianity, is not made in the "image of God" - cannot fellowship or commune with God; therefore, as the entitlement of the "son of perdition" the Beast has no possibility of salvation or fellowship with the Almighty. It is the "temple" of the body of Antichrist that is desecrated in the "spiritual realm" - as it is the future Third Temple in Jerusalem (i.e., earth) which awaits the final confrontation and desecration. (See: [[Daniel's Prophecy of the 2300 Days]] - Sacrifice and Desecration - Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks)<br />
<br />
Some within Premillenial Futurism affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future Third Temple to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks found in Daniel 9:24-27 and thus ensues in ''days'' (lit. ''evening and morning'' - Daniel 8:14) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored or rededicated Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations-(Daniel 12:11) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" (Daniel 8:14) <br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the Abomination of Desolation are futuristic, based upon the many citings found in {{bibleverse||Daniel|7-12|NKJV}}; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to [[Jews]] in a regathered [[Israel]] in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24). Premillenialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days, as well as the additional 1290 days or period of the ''days of abomination''. <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap." The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] (which mirrors the time frame of Jesus' earthly ministry) until the "middle of the week" being the Abomination of Desolation and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Revelation 11:9-11) of the ''reign of the Beast'' being the latter half of the week, with 30 days unto the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the ''Wrath of the Lamb'' or ''Wrath of God'' {Revelation 14:17-20 and Revelation 16:12-21). It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second ''son of perdition'' who shall desecrate the Third Temple and begin his beastly reign for 1290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as ''the Beast'', he will "make a covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of [[Messiah]] to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13).<br />
<br />
''Text used in part from the 1913 International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, a work in the public domain.''<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Bible]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645764Antichrist2009-03-28T23:08:47Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* See Also */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as [[Dajjal]].<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<References/><br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Antichrist&diff=645762Antichrist2009-03-28T23:08:31Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Islam */</p>
<hr />
<div>The '''Antichrist''' in [[Premillenialism]] will persecute faithful Christians during the [[Tribulation]].<br />
<br />
==Etymology==<br />
<br />
The word '''Antichrist''' comes from the [[Greek]] αντί-χριστος (''anti''-''khristos''), meaning ''opposite of Christ''. The Greek word ''anti'' can also mean 'instead of' or "equal to, like" so that the phrase can also be interpreted as meaning ''in place of, or like, Christ'' so while opposing Christ the antichrist will try to appear to be like Christ. Some Christians believe that the use in John refers to a single being that will appear in the [[End Times]]. This view is most commonly found among [[Premillennialism|premillennialist Christians]]. In modern useage, the term is usually used to refer to one who is pure evil. <br />
<br />
== The Antichrist in the Bible ==<br />
The following verses are the only verses which directly use the word Antichrist ([[KJV]])<br />
<br />
:I John 2:18 'as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now there are many antichrists'<br />
<br />
:I John 2:22 'Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieith the Father and the Son.'<br />
<br />
:I John 4:3 'And every spirit that confesseth not that [[Jesus]] Christ is come in the flesh is not of [[God]]: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.<br />
<br />
:2 John 7: 'For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.' <br />
<br />
Based on the lack of direct references, some Christians argue that the Bible refers only to a ''generalized concept'' of Antichrist, applicable to anybody who is 'against Christ', not to a particular person. Moreover, such 'antichrists' were already present in the world nearly two thousand years ago. Other Christian, such as the [[Catholic Church]] and many [[Protestant]] denominations, have argued that these verses mainly prefigure the actual Antichrist and that one can see a single unifying Antichrist figure with the proper exegetical methods if one looks at the books of [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelations]].<ref>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm</ref> So while there is a spirit of antiChrist, there is also one AntiChrist who is to come.<br />
<br />
The Antichrist is often associated with, and in some intrepretations considered equivilent to, the Beast of Revelation or the Man of Sin referenced in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.<br />
==Islam==<br />
[[Islamic]] theology also teaches of an antichrist-like figure known as [[Dajjal]].<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Days Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Oracle of Damascus]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<References/><br />
* Cruden, A., ''Complete Concordance to the Old and New Testaments'' (Lutterworth, 1930)<br />
* ''The Holy Bible'' (King James Version)<br />
* ''The New English Bible'' (Oxford & Cambridge University Presses, 1970)<br />
* ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' (Darton, Longman & Todd, 1990)<br />
* Peake, A.S., ''Commentary on the Bible'' (Nelson, 1962)<br />
* Young, R., ''Analytical Concordance to the Holy Bible'' (Lutterworth, 1939)<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christian Theology]]<br />
[[Category:New Testament]]<br />
[[Category:Islam]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Oracle_of_Damascus&diff=645761Oracle of Damascus2009-03-28T23:07:19Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* See Also */</p>
<hr />
<div>==[[Evangelical]] Futurism (Christian eschatology) and the Oracle of Damascus==<br />
<br />
The “Oracle of [[Damascus]]” or “Burden of Damascus” is recorded in {{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1-14|NKJV}}, as well as in associated passages found in {{bibleverse||Zechariah|9:1-8|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Jeremiah|49:23-27|NKJV}}. These Bible passages – and some say {{bibleverse||Amos|1:3-5|NKJV}} – are considered prophetic by most Evangelical Christians who embrace Futurism (Christian eschatology). Furthermore, some Futurists<ref>{{cite web |url=http://gracethrufaith.com/ikvot-hamashiach/confirming-the-sequence-of-end-times-events/ |title=Evangelical Futurists like Jack Kelley}} </ref> consider {{bibleverse||Psalm|83|NKJV}} as an allusion to [[Israel]]’s immediate neighbors conspiring to destroy Israel as a “Latter Day’s” phenomenon. These Futurists claim that the Bible says modern-day [[Damascus]] will finally come to a quick, devastating and permanent end. They see the opening of {{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1|NKJV}} in no uncertain terms to mean the utter destruction by the world’s oldest, continually-inhabited city<ref>{{cite web |url=http://britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/150420/Damascus |title=Encyclopedia Britannica}} </ref>—an event heretofore which has never been fulfilled, therefore, it still must be considered a prophecy yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“Behold, Damascus will cease from being a city, and it will be a ruinous heap” ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1|NKJV}})<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
The devastation of Damascus will be caused by the future State of [[Israel]] as a result of the Samson Option in response to her very survival. {{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:9|NKJV}} states:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“In that day their strong cities, which '''they left because of the Israelites''', will be like places abandoned to thickets and undergrowth. And all will be desolation.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
They say the Bible even tells how quickly and the precise time of this destruction upon Damascus:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“In the evening, sudden terror! Before the morning, they are gone!” ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:14|NKJV}}).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
They also claim that {{bibleverse||Jeremiah|49:23-27|NKJV}}; especially, verses 26 and 27, substantiate this claim upon Syria’s capital:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“‘Surely, her young men will fall in the streets; all her soldiers will be silenced in that day,‘ declares the LORD Almighty. ‘I will set fire to the walls of Damascus; it will consume the fortresses of Ben-Hadad.’”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Nathan Jones<ref>{{cite web |url=http://lamblion.us/2008/08/prophetic-end-of-damascus.html |title=Nathan Jones of Lamb and Lion Ministries}} </ref> of the Lamb and Lion Ministries Blog – (the Evangelical Premillenial ministry of David Reagan) suggests that an Israeli “nuclear warhead” will spell the demise of Damascus. Jones cites Israeli Prime Minister [[Ehud Olmert]] in his remarks as indicative of Israel’s ultimate quest for survival wherein Israel “would not hold back” if renewed attacks by [[Hezbollah]] were to inflict Israel once again (See: 2006 Lebanon War).<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
There will no longer be a situation of distant fighting, where major cities continue with life as usual. The war will reach the cities and homes of Israeli citizens and our enemy's objective will be to target the home front . . . we will be forced to bring an end to hostilities quickly, at the smallest possible cost, using our comparative advantage (which will be) massive capabilities and tools during the Second Lebanon War that it refrained from using, because it was fighting a terror organization, not a state. ("Olmert: No holding back against Hezbollah"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3584938,00.html |title=Olmert: No holding back against Hezbollah}} </ref> by Roni Sofer, YNetNews, Aug. 19, 2008)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Jones suggests that Russia’s recent incursion into [[Georgia]] (See: 2008 South Ossetia War) foretells the lead-up to another yet future conflict, the Gog Magog War in which [[Russia]] allied with [[Iran]] ([[Persia]]) will descend upon the mountains of Israel in the [[End Times]] ({{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38-39|NKJV}}); therefore,<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
As the Middle East heats up with Russian on the move and the current (April, 2009) Iranian President’s rhetoric against Israel, the players are all playing and positioning themselves for a possible prophetic scenario. The consequence of this will put Israel in a very precarious position; with their back against the wall, Israel may use their nukes and fulfill the ‘Damascus’ prophecy found in [[Isaiah]] and [[Jeremiah]]. (“The Prophetic End of Damascus"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://lamblion.us/2008/08/prophetic-end-of-damascus.html |title=The Prophetic End of Damascus}} </ref> Lamb and Lion Ministries, August 19, 2008)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Premillenarian Ray Stedman (formerly of Peninsula Bible Church of Palo Alto, CA) affirms:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Two verses in Chapter 17 ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1-2|NKJV}}) describe the future of [[Damascus]], a city much in the news today. That has not yet been fulfilled. The infallible Word of God says that Damascus, a large and very old city, ultimately will be destroyed. We are not told how or when this will happen but it will happen, as the Word of God declares. (“Why Do the Nations Rage”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://pbc.org/files/messages/3825/0580.html |title=Why Do the Nations Rage}} </ref> – Ray Stedman, the PBC Library)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Dave Dolan,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://yourisraelconnection.org/david_dolan.htm |title=Dave Dolan}} </ref> a [[Jerusalem]]-based author and journalist, in his text, “Israel in Crisis: What Lies Ahead?"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://cfi-usa.org/mmedia.html |title=Christian Writers from Israel--CFI}} </ref> affirms the Futurist nature of the Oracle of Damascus (pp. 83-84). Dolan’s editorial updates from the Middle East confirm his persistent suspicions that the “Burden of Damascus” is imminent:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Widespread media reports of possible imminent war with [[Syria]]—probably initiated by an attack upon Israel by its puppet [[Hezbollah]] militia force in [[Lebanon]], supported by Palestinian [[Hamas]] fighters in the [[Gaza Strip]], and possibly by [[Iran]] itself—have increased significantly in recent days here in Israel. Military analysts say this indicates something is indeed occurring on the ground to raise the war alert, as confirmed by army sources. (“War Jitters Rock Israel"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:fJneF5SXsIIJ:www.ddolan.com/updates.asp%3Fupdateid%3D131+Dave+Dolan+says+War+with+Syria&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us |title=War Jitters Rock Israel}} </ref> DDolan.com - Israel Update – Jerusalem, April 3, 2008)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
==The Distinction between the Oracle of Damascus and the Gog Magog War== <br />
<br />
Some within the Futurism (Christian eschatology) camp distinguish between the Oracle of Damascus and the Gog-Magog War of {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38-39|NKJV}}. Again, Dave Dolan makes this distinction between the Gog-Magog War and the Oracle of Damascus:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The big news here in Israel today, boldly headlined in the nation’s largest newspaper, ''Yedioth Ahronoth'', this morning, is Russia’s reported return to two naval bases that the [[Kremlin]] largely built and once controlled in neighboring [[Syria]]. The move is said to be part of a large Russian weapons deal with Syria, at least partially funded by [[Iran]], as I reported about in last week’s monthly news update.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The dramatic Russian move will undoubtedly increase speculation among observant Christians and Jews that Ezekiel’s Gog and Magog invasion is drawing very near. In light of author Joel Rosenberg’s<ref>{{cite web |url=http://joelrosenberg.com/about.asp |title=Joel Rosenberg}} </ref> popular novel about the theme, I get asked about this prophecy all the time now as I travel around the world, and especially if I see its fulfillment as possibly imminent.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Frankly I do NOT see Ezekiel’s penultimate prophesied event as taking place in the near-term future. Instead, I suspect that the region could well witness an apparent massive clash between Syria and Israel, described in Isaiah chapter 17, unfolds in the not too distant future, to which Russia and other countries listed by [[Ezekiel]] would eventually react, but not immediately in the climactic way described by Ezekiel. (Dave Dolan, The Isaiah 17 War against Syria/Jordan Comes Before Gog and Magog in Ezek. 38, Global Resource Ministries International Israel Update, August 06, 2007, as found on Philip’s Zionist Blog<ref>{{cite web |url=http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-oKr4rtE_dLIPJ.64cW8g7t4-?cq=1 |title=Philip's Zionist Blog}} </ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Futurist [[Hal Lindsey]] also projects a separate conflict involving Syria which is not connected to the future Gog-Magog conflict:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
All of this (i.e., the current Syrophoenicia War in the [[Levant]] (See 2006 Lebanon War and Syro-Palestinian archaeology)) leads me to believe that [[Damascus]] will be destroyed before the [[Tribulation]] begins. I believe that Damascus is about to so threaten Israel’s existence by either launching or furnishing bio-chemical weapons or radioactive dirty bombs, that Israel will nuke them. Israel has sworn that it will implement the Samson Option against any nation that attacks them with any form of weapons of mass destruction. That means a thermonuclear strike. This may soon happen to [[Syria]]. (Hal Lindsey Oracle –Politically Incorrect – Prophetically Correct – 7/31/2006)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Lindsey continues:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
What is most important is that all this is setting up Ezekiel’s 2600-year-old prophecy in {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38|NKJV}}. [[Persia]], or modern [[Iran]], is listed a chief among the [[Muslim]] nations Russia will lead into an all-out assault against Israel. This is predicted to be the first battle of the war of [[Armageddon]]. The one nation that does not seem to be listed is [[Syria]]. I believe this is because as a result of actions it is now taking against Israel, [[Isaiah]]’s prophecy about Damascus in the last days is going to be soon fulfilled. Twenty Seven hundred years ago, Isaiah warned, “An oracle concerning Damascus: ‘See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins … In that day the glory of Jacob will fade; the fat of his body will waste away.’ ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1-4|NIV}}) To establish the time of this event, look at these factors.<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
First, Damascus is one of the oldest continuously populated cities on earth. It has never been totally destroyed – yet. Second, it is in a context of events that lead up to the catastrophes that precede the Lord Jesus’ [[Second Coming]]. Third, it is far enough away from that event that Jacob (Israel) is enduring terrible circumstances. Fourth, Syria and the tribal name of its forefathers are not mentioned in the Russian led Muslim Confederacy that launches [[Armageddon]] in the middle of the [[Tribulation]]. (“Uncovered: Russian-Syrian-Iranian Axis"<ref>{{cite web |url=http://hallindsey.com/ |title=Uncovered: Russian-Syrian-Iranian Axis}} </ref> Hal Lindsey Oracle.com, Hal Lindsey, July 24, 2006)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
==Three Prophetic Wars==<br />
<br />
In his '''''Prophetic Sequence''''':<ref>{{cite web |url=http://the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/prophetic_sequence_intro.htm |title=Prophetic Sequence}} </ref> ''Trident Wars'';<ref>{{cite web |url=http://the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/prophetic_sequence_pt1.htm |title=Trident Wars}} </ref> ''Damascus Will Cease from being a City'';<ref>{{cite web |url=http://the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/prophetic_sequence_pt2.htm |title=Damascus Will Cease from being a City}} </ref> and ''Israel’s War'',<ref>{{cite web |url=http://the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/prophetic_sequence_pt4.htm |title=Israel's War}} </ref> blogger Doug Krieger of the Tribulation Network,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://the-tribulation-network.com/ |title=the Tribulation Network}} </ref> distinguishes three prophetic wars<ref>{{cite web |url=http://the-tribulation-network.com/new_tribnet/ebooks/rise_or_fall/rise_or_fall_part_28.html |title=Three Prophetic Wars - Doug Krieger, the Tribulation Network}} </ref> to occur in ever-widening circles around Israel. The three are: The Oracle of Damascus (which Krieger claims will occur prior to the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks at the end of days ({{bibleverse||Daniel|9:24-27|NKJV}}) and before the infamous “Treaty of Death and Hell” ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|28:15|NKJV}} and {{bibleverse||Isaiah|28:18|NKJV}}) or “Covenant with the Many”- i.e., the “majority of Israel” ({{bibleverse||Daniel|9:27|NKJV}}) which will be made by the [[Antichrist]] with Israel; the Gog Magog War of {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38:1-23|NKJV}}; {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|39:1-16|NKJV}}; and {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:40-43|NKJV}} which will occur during the first 40 days of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks; and, finally: “The Campaign (See [[Armageddon]] Dwight Pentecost of Dallas Seminary and Dispensationalism) of Armageddon” which Krieger asserts will persist throughout the remainder the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks until the Second Coming of Christ at the conclusion of the 1290 days of desolations ({{bibleverse||Daniel|12:11|NKJV}}) – beginning in {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:44-45|NKJV}} and concluding in {{bibleverse||Daniel|12:12|NKJV}} with the climax occurring at the so-called “Battle of Armageddon” (Citing: {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|39:17-20|NKJV}}; {{bibleverse||Joel|2:30-32|NKjV}}; {{bibleverse||Joel|3:1-17|NKJV}}; {{bibleverse||Revelation|16:12-16|NKJV}}; {{bibleverse||Revelation|19:11-21|NKJV}}). (Please See: [[Abomination of Desolation]])<br />
<br />
Krieger sees the modern states of Syria (“Damascus” or the “land of Hadrach” and “Hamath” – {{bibleverse||Zechariah|9:1-2|NKJV}}; or “Damascus, Syria” and the “cities of Aroer” – {{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1-3|NKJV}}) -, Lebanon (“[[Tyre]] and [[Sidon]]” – {{bibleverse||Zechariah|9:2-4|NKJV}}); the Palestinian entities of [[Gaza]] ({{bibleverse||Zechariah|9:5-7|NKJV}}); and the [[West Bank]] (i.e., “the stronghold or fortress of [[Ephraim]]” – {{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:3|NKJV}}) conspiring against Israel as a four-fold agitation leading towards the very Oracle of Damascus itself and that the “end of the war” mentioned in {{bibleverse||Daniel|9:26|NKJV}} prior to the covenant made by the [[Antichrist]] in {{bibleverse||Daniel|9:27|NKJV}} is the current [[Arab-Israeli Conflict]] which started in 1948 and will persist to the conclusion of the Burden of Damascus. Krieger claims that the Oracle of Damascus occurs in {{bibleverse||Zechariah|9|NKJV}} as the “grand opening” of the “Messianic Scenario” which stretches from {{bibleverse||Zechariah|9|NKJV}} through the end of {{bibleverse||Zechariah|14|NKJV}}—i.e., the final “countdown” to the Messianic Age starts at the Oracle of Damascus and continues throughout the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and results in the defeat of the Antichrist-Beast and the triumph of the saints ({{bibleverse||Daniel|7:27|NKJV}}) with Messiah and the commencement of the Messianic Age.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, he states that Israel’s defeat of the constellation of nations allied against her at the Oracle of Damascus will result in what he calls the “bankruptcy of secular Zionism” vis-à-vis “Biblical Zionism”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://biblicalzionist.org/ |title=Israeli Biblical Zionists}} </ref> ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:4|NKJV}}: “In that day it shall come to pass that the glory of Jacob will fade, and the fatness of his flesh grow lean”). This will result in the building of the [[Third Temple]] under the orchestrated false peace of “the Coming Prince” ({{bibleverse||Daniel|9:26-27|NKJV}}) (See: Sir Robert Anderson and “The Coming Prince”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/coming_prince/Coming_prince_ch01.htm |title=The Coming Prince, by Sir Robert Anderson}} </ref>). What distinguishes, according to Krieger, the Oracle of Damascus from the Gog-Magog conflagration are the constellation of nations mentioned and/or omitted in the Bible passages of these two conflicts—let alone their dissimilarities juxtaposed to the Armageddon Campaign. They are not the same prophetic conflicts because the nations and/or peoples mentioned allied against Israel are dissimilar.<br />
<br />
'''Oracle of Damascus'''<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Israel vs. [[Syria]]/[[Damascus]], [[Lebanon]] ([[Hezbollah]]), [[Gaza]] ([[Hamas]]) and the Palestinian Authority<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The “[[Tyre]] and [[Sidon]]” or [[Lebanon]] would, under Krieger’s scenario, be galvanized against Israel through [[Hezbollah]] and the Palestinian entities of [[Gaza]] ([[Hamas]]) and the “Stronghold of [[Ephraim]]” would constitute today's Palestinian Authority.<br />
<br />
'''Gog-Magog War'''<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Israel vs. Gog, the land of Magog, Rosh – the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal ({{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38:1-3|NKJV}})Persia, Cush or Ethiopia, and Put or [[Libya]] (Ezekiel 38:5; and Daniel 11:43), [[Egypt]] (Daniel 11:42-43)<br />
[[Gomer]], Togarmah ({{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38:6|NKJV}})<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Krieger asserts that ''Gog'' is a chief spiritual “principality” against Israel and that Meshech, Tubal, Gomer and Togarmah constitute peoples populating the modern state of [[Turkey]]; whereas they, together with [[Persia]], are allied as the “king of the North” in {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:40|NKJV}} and that the “king of the South” ({{bibleverse||Daniel|11:40|NKJV}}) is comprised of the modern states of Egypt, Libya and [[Sudan]] (ancient Ethiopia – not the Cush of the [[Levant]] or of ancient [[Assyria]]) - all allied against [[Antichrist]]. Those allied with Israel in the Gog-Magog conflict are the modern states of the Saudi [[Arabian Peninsula]] (Sheba and Dedan – {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38:13|NKJV}}) and [[the West]] (i.e., “the merchants of Tarshish” headed up by the [[United States of America]]” – the leader of the West. Finally, Krieger conjectures, that whereas the center of the conflict in Ezekiel is Israel, the center of the conflict in {{bibleverse||Daniel|11:40-43|NKJV}} is [[Antichrist]] who is allied with Israel—the same conflict.<br />
<br />
'''Armageddon or “Battle of Armageddon” or “Campaign of Armageddon”'''<br />
<br />
Antichrist vs. “News from the East” (i.e., Antichrist vs. Asia) and “the North” (i.e., Antichrist vs. [[Russia]]) – culminating in world war and ultimately involving all the nations of the earth climaxing their struggle at Mount Megiddo in Northern Israel (Armageddon – {{bibleverse||Revelation|16:16|NKJV}}) with the finale taking place at the Valley of Jehoshaphat (near [[Jerusalem]] - {{bibleverse||Joel|3:2-12|NKJV}}), resulting in the miraculous intervention of the [[Messiah]] whom the Christians believe is [[Jesus Christ]] and whom the [[Orthodox Jews]] affirm to be their final deliverer.<br />
<br />
Finally, Paul Robertson, in “Damascus Will No Longer Be a City”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:1x2b9rZkX9MJ:www.apocalypsesoon.org/xfile-9.html+Oracle+of+Damascus+is+not+future+prophecy&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us |title=Damascus Will No Longer Be a City}} </ref> (Apocalypse Soon, the Xcellent Files) distinguishes the Oracle of Damascus from the Gog-Magog War:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Isaiah's clues indicate that the multinational attack that follows the destruction of Damascus is the Gog/Magog war of {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38-39|NKJV}}.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
==Criticism of the Futurist Interpretation of the “Oracle of Damascus”==<br />
<br />
<br />
In “The Rejection of Pascal’s Wagner – A Skeptic’s Guide to Christianity” in the section dealing with “Isaiah’s Failed Prophecies”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://geocities.com/paulntobin/prophecies.html#2 |title=Isaiah's Failed Prophecies}} </ref> it states:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In a similar vein, Isaiah predicted the complete and utter destruction of Damascus ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1-2|NKJV}}) An oracle concerning Damascus. See, "Damascus will cease to be a city, and will become a heap of ruins. Her towns will be deserted forever...." As we noted above, it is now almost three millennia since that prophecy and Damascus remains a vibrant city to this day. While Damascus had been overran many times in its past, it is still around. Thus the prophecy that says Damascus will cease to be a city forever is obviously false. (Callahan, Bible Prophecy: p60)<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
Michael David Magee in “Prophecies of the Messiah”<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:qZKm3ux4w3gJ:www.askwhy.co.uk/christianity/0240Prophecies.php+Oravcle+of+Damascus+Criticism+as+future+Prophecy&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us |title=Prophecies of the Messiah}} </ref> refutes the claims of the Oracle of Damascus as mere ancient Israelite jealousies of surrounding and more powerful nations or Christian fantasies:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Many events have happened in every country, anticipated by studious people, as the result of natural causes such as the ravages and downfall of cities and the overthrow of empires. Jewish prophets were angry because more powerful nations had overpowered Israel and held the Israelites in subjection. They felt that God must eventually right these wrongs to His chosen people and were always prophesying against the conquering nations like Egypt, Assyria and Babylonia. Naturally this was in reality just wishful thinking and many of the prophecies never happened. Babylon, Tyre, Damascus, and other cities belonging to those hostile neighbors the Jews so much envied and execrated, were not destroyed and indeed survive to this day.<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote> <br />
The prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, all poured out thunders upon Damascus. Isaiah declared it should be a “ruinous heap” ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1|NKJV}}). Jeremiah predicted its destruction by fire ({{bibleverse||Jeremiah|49:27|NKJV}}). Damascus still stands, with a large population. It has suffered less by ravages of war and the scythe of time than almost any other city of the east. It has stood over three thousand years without becoming anything like a “ruinous heap".<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The Old Testament prophecies against Tyre and Egypt are failed prophecies. Ezekiel prophesied that Nebuchadnezzar would completely destroy Tyre and that it would never be found again (Ezek 26:7-14, 21; 27:36; 28:19), but two hundred and fifty years after Nebuchadnezzar’s time Alexander had to siege it into submission, having found it a strong commercial city. It still is. Nebuchadnezzar had destroyed only the parts of Tyre that were accessible—on the mainland—his siege of the island acropolis failing. St. Jerome, of the fourth century, declared Tyre to be, then, the finest city of [[Phoenicia]] and was astonished that Ezekiel’s prophecy had so utterly failed.<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
Others conclude that the Oracle of Damascus has been fulfilled:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The passage {{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1-11|NKJV}} is an oracle concerning Damascus and North Israel, in which Isaiah predicts the fate of the two allies--Syria and Ephraim--in the Syro-Ephraimitic war of 734 BC, with a promise that only a scanty remnant will survive ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:6|NKJV}}). In {{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:12-14|NKJV}}, the prophet boldly announces the complete annihilation of Judah's unnamed foes--the [[Assyrians]]. (See: Next Bible<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:bp0z-pH_imsJ:net.bible.org/dictionary.php%3Fword%3DIsaiah,%25201-7+Oracle+of+Damascus+Criticism+as+future+Prophecy&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us |title=Next Bible}} </ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The late Premillenial Evangelical John Walvoord of Dallas Theological Seminary (Dallas, Texas) believed that the Prophecy against Damascus was “fulfilled in history and prophecy” (i.e., there is no future fulfillment):<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
{{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1-8|NKJV}}. The coming destruction of Damascus, one of the ancient cities of the Middle East, the capital city of Aram, was predicted ({{bibleverse||Isaiah|17:1-2|NKJV}}). Damascus was allied with Israel in fighting the Assyrians, but it would all be to no avail because the Assyrians would triumph. Jacob would be like a person with a fat body that wasted away (v. 4). The destruction of Damascus was fulfilled in history and prophecy.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
==Armageddon Theology vs. [[Evangelical]] Covenantalism==<br />
<br />
The criticism of Futurism's "Armageddon Theology" is widespread because of its socio-political or religio-political implications:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
A large group of Protestant fundamentalists and evangelicals believe in Armageddon theology. That theology is based on three passages in the Bible. One is in {{bibleverse||Revelation|16:16|NKJV}}, which is supposed to predict a final battle at a place called [[Armageddon]], where God would destroy the world. Those who believe this have also chosen another Bible passage, {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38-39|NKJV}}. In these chapters, there is reference to Gog of the country of Magog, which is far to the north and is assumed to be Russia. One passage, {{bibleverse||Ezekiel|38:15-16|NKJV}}, speaks of many peoples, "all of them riding on horses, a great host, a mighty army... [who] will come up against my people Israel.... A few verses later God says, "I will rain upon him and his hordes and the many people that are with him torrential rains and hailstones, fire and brimstone." According to Armageddon theology, this is a description of a nuclear holocaust. This prophecy is obviously an anachronism in the 21st century, because the weapons in Chapter 39 are not bombs, missiles, tanks, and artillery, but "shields and bucklers, bows and arrows, hand-pikes and spears." Nevertheless these religious fundamentalists, who believe every word in the Bible to be inerrant, are somehow comfortable assuming that Ezekiel's exact catalogue is a description of modern war.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3861/is_200207/ai_n9101870 |title=John M. Swomley, Armageddon Theology - A Worry for the Rest of Us}} </ref> <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Stephen Sizer in his text, ''Zion's Christian Soldiers?'' criticizes his Evangelical counterparts for their embrace of a "prophetic Israel" and the pseudo Bible prophecy they trumpet. Various Christian - some Futurist Premillenial Evangelicals would label him and those who celebrate his theology as clear supercessionism-style or replacement theology-style eschatology. Those who have critiqued Sizer's demonstrate their impassioned theological construct - a sample will suffice:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''Zion's Christian Soldiers?'' ought to be on the required reading list for all students of the Bible. Here is basic and fundamental methodology which challenges many evangelical assumptions about "end times prophecy." Here is a sound-minded, Christ-centered critique of a popularly accepted but nonetheless fatally flawed perspective that leads to many spiritual dysfunctions. If you find yourself troubled by saber-rattling political rhetoric coming from many pulpits, ''Zion's Christian Soldiers'' will reacquaint you with the Prince of peace. (Greg Albrecht, President of Plain Truth Ministries, and Editor-in-Chief, The Plain Truth magazine (author of ''Revelation Revolution & Bad News Religion'').<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Thank God, here comes at last a book that challenges the pseudo-theology which, by giving precedence to the Old Covenant over the New, relegates the Church to the status of concubine in order to make Israel the Bride of Christ. In clear and measured terms, the author demonstrates from Scripture that God's purposes for history are not driven by a narrowly selective racist obsession but rather by his eternal design to create the Church, the new community dearly secured through the cross for all Christ-followers, both Jews and Gentiles. (Professor Gilbert Bilezikian, Professor Emeritus, [[Wheaton College]] and a founding leader of Willow Creek Community Church, South Barrington, Illinois, (author of ''The Liberated Gospel, Beyond Sex Roles, Christianity 101 and Community 101'')<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In this very readable new work, Anglican vicar Stephen Sizer offers a biblically-based interpretation of the relationship of Israel and the Christian church. Turning to the current upsurge of Christian Zionism, Sizer examines its deeply flawed misreadings of key biblical texts and its troubling public-policy implications. Not only Sizer’s fellow evangelicals, but everyone interested in this vital topic, will find ''Zion’s Christian Soldiers?'' an illuminating and highly valuable study.” (Professor Paul S. Boyer, James Pinckney Harrison Visiting Professor at William & Mary in Williamsburg, Va., and editor-in-chief of ''The Oxford Companion to American History'' (Oxford University Press, 2001).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://cc-vw.org/articles/zcsreviews.htm|title=Zion's Christian Soldiers}} A compendium of authors/reviewers of ''Zion's Christian Soldier's'' who oppose Armageddon theology.</ref> <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The struggle between supercessionism-style Covenantalism and various forms of hyper-Dispensationalism over any future "prophetic wars" runs deep and acerbic in its rhetoric - both sides profess [[Evangelical]] fervor and both sides are keenly aware of the implications of their belief systems.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
* [[2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8]]<br />
* [[Abomination of Desolation]]<br />
* [[Antichrist]]<br />
* [[Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Armageddon]]<br />
* [[Book of Daniel]]<br />
* [[Book of Revelation]]<br />
* [[Eschatology]]<br />
* [[End times]]<br />
* [[Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse]]<br />
* [[Last Judgment]]<br />
* [[Millenarianism]]<br />
* [[Preterism]]<br />
* [[Postmillennialism]]<br />
* [[Rapture|The Rapture]]<br />
* [[Third Temple]]<br />
* [[Two Witnesses]]<br />
<br />
[[Category:Christianity]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457582300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T23:00:58Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |author=Taze Russell| publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author=Jason Wallace| publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''| publisher=<br />
The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457552300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T22:58:20Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Mormonism and the 2300 Days */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author=Jason Wallace| publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''| publisher=<br />
The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457542300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T22:57:25Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Mormonism and the 2300 Days */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author=Jason Wallace| publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Churchurl=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| publisher=Mormon Truth}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''| publisher=<br />
The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457492300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T22:55:04Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author=Jason Wallace| publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/|title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''| publisher=<br />
The Tribulation Network}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457472300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T22:53:18Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Mormonism and the 2300 Days */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author=Jason Wallace| publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/|title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457452300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T22:51:15Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author=Jason Wallace| publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/|title=1844-Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457432300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T22:48:47Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall| author|Jason Wallace| url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm |publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/|title=1844-Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457412300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T22:46:59Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| author|Jason Wallace| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall |url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm |publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/|title=1844-Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwmhttps://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=2300_Day_Prophecy_of_Daniel_8&diff=6457392300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 82009-03-28T22:39:40Z<p>Kriegerdwm: /* Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year */</p>
<hr />
<div>== 2300 Day Prophecy of Daniel 8 ==<br />
In apocalyptic literature<ref>{{cite web|author=Robert E. Lerner |title=Apocalyptic Literature|url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/29733/apocalyptic-literature |publisher=Encyclopedia Britannica}}</ref> the ''year-day principle'' or ''day-year principle'' is an interpretive means to calculate past or future events. In the mid-1800s the American religious landscape was profoundly affected by these interpretive methods. The “day” is sometimes interpreted as “year” – especially prominent among eschatologists who embrace Historicism<ref>{{cite web|title=Historicism|url=http://www.historicism.net/| publisher=Historicism Research Foundation, A Service of The Puritans' Network}}</ref>—e.g., [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]].”<ref>{{cite web|author=Jerry Moon|title=The Year-Day Principle|url=http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/end/yearday.htm|publisher=SDAnet}}</ref>).<br />
<br />
However, certain Premillenarian<ref>{{cite web|title=What is premillennialism?|publisher=gotQuestions?org|url=http://www.gotquestions.org/premillennialism.html}}</ref> Futurists<ref>{{cite web|title=Futurism|url=http://www.123exp-beliefs.com/t/00801188791/|publisher=The Language of Religion - Dictionary and Research Guide}}</ref> and, in particular, Dispensationalists<ref>{{cite web|author=Michael J. Vlach|title=What is Dispensationalism|url=http://www.theologicalstudies.org/dispen.html|publisher=TheologicalStudies.org}}</ref>, can interpret “day” to mean “year” and visa-versa. Similar beliefs on the “day-year” or “year-day” are held among Jehovah’s Witnesses<ref>{{cite web|title=Watchtower - Official Site of Jehovah's Witnesses|url=http://www.watchtower.org/| publisher=Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania}}</ref> and [[Mormonism]].<br />
<br />
== Interpretations – Early Church to Present ==<br />
<br />
Hermeneutical controversy over the use of “years is equal to days” in Bible Prophecy has existed since Tychonius<ref>{{cite web| title=Tichonius| url=http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/tyconius.php| publisher=Early Church.org}}</ref> in 380 AD interpreted the three-and-a-half days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as three-and-a-half years (i.e., three days and a half is equal to three years and six months or 1260 days or 42 months or “time, times and half a time” - (''dies tres et dimidium; id est annos tres et menses sex''). The significance of this interpretation had a direct affect upon Bible expositors who embraced Historicism (Christian Eschatology) as their brand of prophetic interpretation (e.g., Historicist, [[Sir Isaac Newton]] held that that the Second Coming of Christ<ref>{{cite web| title=The Second Coming - Jesus' Promise |url=http://www.allaboutgod.com/the-second-coming.htm |publisher=All About God}}</ref> would arrive on 2060 AD, derived from the following:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The year 800 is a significant one in history, as it is the year Charlemagne was crowned emperor of Rome in the west by Pope Leo III at St. Peter's in Rome. Since Newton believed that the 1260 years corresponded to the duration of the corruption of the Church, he added 1260 to 800 A.D. and arrived at the date 2060 for the ‘fall of Babylon’ or cessation of the apostate Church.” <ref>{{cite web|author= Stephen D. Snobelen |title=Statement on the date 2060|url=http://www.isaac-newton.org/update.html|publisher=Isaac Newton – Theology, Prophecy, Science and Religion}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The time frame of the seventy weeks or “Seventy Sevens of Years” is associated with Daniel’s people, the Jews, and the holy city, Jerusalem. The fact that the weeks of years (490 years) are 360 day years is established by a comparison of Daniel 7:25 with Revelation 11:2, 3, 12:6, 14, and 13:5. The weeks of years begin with the commandment by Artaxerxes in 445 B. C. to restore Jerusalem. Chronologically, they are divided as:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Seven sevens: 49 years—445 to 396 B.C. - From Artaxerxes’ decree to the arrival of Nehemiah - And the covenant renewal celebration at Jerusalem)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
Sixty-two sevens: 434 years—396 B.C. to A.D. 32 - From the dedication of the second temple to the Crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
One Seven: 7 years—Unfulfilled. (Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1135)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Using this method of interpretation - the “day-year principle” or the “year-day principle” or using a “year-for-a-day principle” - a variety of more recent Biblical Prophecy applications have developed. During the modern era the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]] popularized the use of the “Day-year principle. <br />
<br />
Historically, in the Fifth Century, Faustus of Riez validated Revelation 11:9, 11 use of “days” to mean “years” by stating “three and a half days which correspond to three years and six months” (Treset dimidius dies tribus annis et sexs mensibus respondent). Again, in 550 A.D. Primasius substantiated Faustus’ interpretation.<ref>EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862</ref> In 730 A.D. the Christian expositor Bede confirmed Revelation 11:9 to mean “Days = Years.” During the Ninth Century Haymo and Anspert gave credence to this interpretation of Revelation 11:9, 11).<ref>{{cite web| title=Year-day principle |url=http://encyclopedia.vbxml.net/Year-day_principle| publisher=Encyclopedia VBXML}}</ref><br />
<br />
Primasius appears to be the first in history to equate “Day-year” by using Numbers 14:34 then extrapolating it to confirm the “Day-year” of Revelation 11:9. ('More Scripturae loquentis utentes, quod dictium legius de quadraginta diebus quibus exploratores terram Channan circuierunt, anus pro die reputabitur; ut hic, versa vice, dies pro anno positus agnoscatur', Prismasius as cited by EB Elliott, 'Horae Apocalypticae', volume III, page 280, fifth edition, 1862)<br />
<br />
At question among the Early Church Fathers, who wrote much concerning Bible Prophecy (i.e., Eschatology), was a seeming disconnect concerning the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 and its placement within the time frame of Daniel’s 70th Week, yet future. However, the futurity of Daniel’s Seventieth Week was a piece of eschatology not neglected by the likes of the Early Church Fathers. Furthermore, their understanding that the 70th Week of Daniel was yet a literal prophecy to be fulfilled in its entirety – not as “2520 day/years” (i.e., 7 years or 1260 days/3.5 years yet to be fulfilled, meaning that 3.5 years was already fulfilled in history) but as a literal seven-year period of time yet to be fulfilled in its entirety. <br />
<br />
Notwithstanding, Primasius and others highlighted the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 as “years.” Were we to discover that the days of Revelation 11:9, 11 were connected to the actual “days” of Daniel’s 70th Week (i.e., the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute at least one-half of Daniel’s 70th Week insofar as Early Church Fathers’ interpretations—that would be a rare discovery); however, Hippolytus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Hippolytus of Rome|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07360c.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> interpreted the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel as yet future:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
39. Thus, then, does the prophet (Daniel) set forth these things concerning the Antichrist, who shall be shameless, a war-maker, and despot, who, exalting himself above all kings and above every god, shall build the city of Jerusalem, and restore the sanctuary. Him the impious will worship as God, and will bend to him the knee, thinking him to be the Christ. He shall cut off the two witnesses and forerunners of Christ, who proclaim His glorious kingdom from heaven, as it is said: ‘And I will give (power) unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
193 As also it was announced to Daniel: ‘And one week shall confirm a covenant with many; and in the midst of the week it shall be that the sacrifice and oblation shall be removed’-that the one week might be shown to be divided into two. The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half; and Antichrist shall make war upon the saints during the test (sic? “rest” or “remainder”) of the week (i.e., the last three-and-one-half-years, editor’s note), and desolate the world, that what is written may be fulfilled: ‘And they shall make the abomination of desolation for a thousand two hundred and ninety days.’” (The interpretation by Hippolytus, (bishop) of Rome, of the visions of Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, taken in conjunction. 157)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Hippolytus saw the “one week might be shown to be divided into two” (or two periods of 3.5 years each) is confirmed by his statement that “The two witnesses, then, shall preach three years and a half.” Hence, if the Seventieth Week of Daniel is equal to seven years, then the seven days of the 70th Week of Daniel would constitute a seven-year time frame, ipso facto, seven days is equal to seven years, adding legitimacy that the “Day-year principle” was upheld by Hippolytus as well—although he did not specifically state that the 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 constitute 3.5 years.<br />
<br />
As prolific as some of the Early Church Fathers were in their eschatological writings (e.g., [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]], Lactantius<ref>{{cite web| title=Lucius Caecilius Firmianus Lactantius |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08736a.htm | publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> Cyprian<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Cyprian of Carthage |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04583b.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref>, [[Jerome]], or [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]], they did not reflect upon interpreting Revelation 11:9, 11; however, it appears that Victorinus<ref>{{cite web| title=St. Victorinus |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15414a.htm |publisher=New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> may have done so. Therefore, of the three who did expound upon Revelation 11:9, 11, it appears that all of them understood the “three-and-a-half days” of Revelation 11:9, 11, to mean “years.” Likewise, to assume that they saw, as Hippolytus, that these 3.5 days were part of the final Seventieth Week (in its entirety) to be yet future, is not a stretch of historical revisionism, nor, for that matter, that Hippolytus would not concur with the “three’s” interpretations.<br />
<br />
As a digression, Historicism sees the Seventieth Week of Daniel as already fulfilled—normally taken the Baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist as the commencement of the Seventieth Week, and then in the midst of the week the “covenant” is broken and the Messiah is “cut off.” Then, from the crucifixion of Jesus until the baptism of the Holy Spirit in the house of Cornelius (i.e., the gospel preached to the Gentiles), is seen as the terminus of Daniel’s Seventieth Week – a period of seven years. <ref>{{cite web| title=Daniel's 70th Week 490 Years|url=http://www.angelfire.com/nt/books/daniel.html|publisher=Power of the Cross Ministries}}</ref><br />
<br />
Expositors have used the following passages to confirm that “days” should be interpreted as “years.”<br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
(1) Genesis 29:27 states that “Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work.” (NIV)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(2) Numbers 14:34 – The children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, which was equal to the 40 days that the spies spent in their initial disclosures into the Land of [[Canaan]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(3) Ezekiel 4:5-6 – Ezekiel was told to lie for 390 days on his left side. Then told to lie for 40 days on his right side. This would equal the total number of years in which both Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah (the tribes of Benjamin and Judah) would be punished.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
(4) Daniel 9:24-27 – The 490 years or 70 “sevens” or “septets” of years is equal to 490 days (there being 7 days to a week “x” 70 weeks = 490 years).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Criticism of Day-year principle===<br />
<br />
Critics charge that these postulations do not lend credence to the “Day-year principle.” They claim that the words “day” or “year” are simply meant to be taken symbolically—no fundamental hermeneutical rule is being set. They claim that Daniel 9:24-27 doesn’t support a day-year principle – the “seventy sevens” are simply “septets” or “heptads” and not seventy “weeks” and the word “day” cannot be found in Daniel’s passage.<br />
<br />
===Historicism’s Interpretations – 2300 days vs. 1260 days===<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref> {{cite web| title=Review and Herald Publishing Association| url=http://www.rhpa.org/index.php/general/bible_commentary_support}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref>{{cite web| title=SDA1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Adventist Review - Adventist News}}</ref> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
* 312 AD to 1572<br />
* 606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
* 533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendancy and defeat by Napoleon).<ref name="SDA1260">{{cite book |title=Seventh-day Adventists Believe (2nd ed) |publisher=Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists |date=2005|ISBN=1-57847-041-2 |pages=184–185}}</ref><br />
<br />
==== Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy ====<br />
<br />
Historicists, like the Seventh-day Adventist Church, normally interpret the 2300 days of Daniel 8:13-14 to mean “years.” The 3.5 days of Revelation 11:9, 11 are likewise interpreted as years—years which, according to some Seventh-Day Adventists occurred during the [[French Revolution]], between 1789 and 1796. <ref>{{cite web| title=SDA 1260| url=http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=74| publisher=Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Review and Herald Publishing Association}}</ref><br />
<br />
Likewise, the 1260 days, or 42 months, mentioned in both Daniel and Revelation are understood by some Historicists to mean “years.”<br />
Historicist interpreters have usually understood the "time, times and half a time", "1260 days" and "42 months" mentioned in [[Book of Daniel|Daniel]] and [[Book of Revelation|Revelation]] to be references to the same time duration (though some have considered them separate durations). They are typically understood to represent a period of 1260 years.<ref name="SDA1260"/> (Please see: Daniel 7:25, 12:7, Revelation 11:2, 3; 12:6, 14; 13:5)<br />
Historicists, in the main, have seen the Seventieth Week of Daniel partially or fully fulfilled in history. The 1260 days were seen to have been fulfilled in time past<ref>Leroy Edwin Froom, ''The Prophetic Faith Of Our Fathers'', volume II (1948) pages 784, 787; volume III (1946) pages 744-745; volume IV (1982) pages 392, 395-397, 399-400:</ref><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
312 AD to 1572<br />
606/610 AD to 1866/1870<br />
533/538 AD to 1793/1798<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The Seventh-Day Adventists affirm that the 1260 days were fulfilled between 538 A.D. and 1798 A.D. (considered the time of Papal ascendency and defeat by Napoleon).<ref>"Seventh-day Adventists Believe" (2nd ed), Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 2005, ISBN=1-57847-041-2, pages 184–185</ref><br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel’s 2300 Day Prophecy found in Daniel 8:12-14 has been interpreted by the [[Seventh-day Adventist Church]], Jehovah’s Witnesses <ref>{{cite web|title=About Jehovah’s Witnesses|url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/witness.htm |publisher=Religious Tolerance.org}}</ref>, the [[Mormons]] and by Harold Camping <ref>{{cite web |title=Harold Camping of Family Radio|url=http://www.familyradio.com/}}</ref>, as well as Historicist Larry Wilson of Day Star<ref>{{cite web| title=Wake-Up|url=http://www.wake-up.org/daystar/DSIndex1997.htm| author=Larry Wilson}}</ref> to mean “years” – not “literal days.”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
For this survey, I purposely selected writers who wrote before the beginning of the 19th century when Baptist evangelist, William Miller<ref>{{cite web | title=William Miller |url=http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=274| publisher=Ohio History Central - an Online Encyclopedia of Ohio History}}</ref> (origins of Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses), and many others, both in Europe and the United States began teaching that the 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) would end during the 19th century. It is important to note that before the 19th century there was no consensus position on the meaning of Daniel 8. In fact, very little has ever been written on Daniel 8 during the past two millenniums. Historically speaking, William Miller was among the first to bring Daniel 8:14 out of obscurity. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14) <ref>{{cite web | title=The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14|url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:97g4jrgCChIJ:www.wake-up.org/daystar/ds1998/AUG98A.htm+Mormons+and+the+2,300+days&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us|author|Larry Wilson|publisher=Day Star |date=July/August 1998}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
The Dispensationalists like C. I. Scofield <ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.raptureme.com/resource/scofield/scofield.html | title=C. I. Scofield |publisher=Rapture Ready}}</ref> affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 were fulfilled in history past during the time of Antioochus IV Epiphanes – but Historicist Larry Wilson disputes Scofield’s assertions: <br />
“So, where did Scofield place the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14? In his Bible commentary on Daniel 8 he states, ‘This prediction was fulfilled during the bitter persecution under Antiochus Epiphanies IV and in the cleansing of the sanctuary in Jerusalem.’ He is referring to a time-period that reaches from 168 B.C. to 162 B.C., historically known as the Revolt of the Maccabeans under Judas Maccabeus. <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=672&letter=J |title=Judas Maccabeus |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
Scofield’s reasoning is both simple and straightforward: He concludes that the ram of Daniel 8 is Persia and the goat is Grecia. (The Bible clearly states this.) Scofield then concludes that the horn power of Daniel 8:9 must be Antiochus Epiphanies (sic.) IV, a king who came out of Syria (which was located in one of the four divisions of the Grecian empire). Historians tell us that Antiochus persecuted the Jews and profaned their temple in Jerusalem. Scofield places the beginning of the 2300 days on December 6, 167 B.C. when Antiochus desecrated the temple and ends that time-period on March 27, 160 B.C. when General Nicanor <ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=265&letter=N |title=Nacanor |author=Richard Gootheil and Samuel Krauss |publisher=JewishEncyclopedia.com}}</ref> was killed. (Larry Wilson, The 2,300 Days of Daniel 8:14, Day Star, July-August, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Seventh Day Adventists and the Origins of the Interpretation of the 2300 Day-Year===<br />
<br />
In a series of quotations from sundry sources, the origins of the 2300 Day-year and its socio-religio importance upon American Christianity cannot be underestimated—especially those outside of American mainstream [[Protestantism]].<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The origins of Seventh-day Adventism can be traced to William Miller, a Baptist preacher during the early 1800s in New England—(and to the belief that the 2300 days should be interpreted as years). He was convinced that the Scriptures contained coded information about the end of the world and the [[Rapture]].<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
He also realized that he had an obligation to teach his findings to others. In 1831, he started to preach; the next year, he wrote articles about his findings. In 1833, he published a pamphlet on end-time prophecy. In 1842, his book Evidences from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:gpKB2VxqncUJ:www.sacred-texts.com/chr/esc/index.htm+Evidences+from+Scripture+and+History+of+the+Second+Coming+of+Christ&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us |title=Evidence from Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ |author=William Miller | publisher=Sacred Texts of Christianity}}</ref> about the Year 1843 was published. (The Rapture, Hoax or Hope, Religious Tolerance, Ontario, Canada).<br />
</blockquote> <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of the key texts that he interpreted was in the Book of Daniel: Daniel heard two angels talking; one asked how long it will take until the destruction of the Temple is avenged and it is restored to its rightful state. The other replied in Daniel 8:14 . . . <br />
‘And he said unto me, unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Miller affirmed that the 2300 days constituted one year each and that their commencement occurred in 457 B.C. He concluded that the cleansing of the temple (i.e. the Second Coming) would occur sometime between two spring equinoxes: 1843-March-21 to 1844-March-21. He found other methods of calculating the end time which also seemed to point to the year 1843 CE. In common with all other predictions of the Second Coming, the end didn't happen on cue. Samuel Snow, a follower of Miller, then interpreted the ‘tarrying time’ referred to in Habakkuk 2:3 as equal to 7 months and 10 days, delaying the end time to 1844-OCT-22. That prophecy also did not come to pass. Many believers left the movement in what has become known as The Great Disappointment.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.ctlibrary.com/ch/1999/issue61/61h031.html |title=American Adventism: The Great Disappointment |author=Bruce Shelley |date=January 1, 1999 |publisher=Christianity Today Library – Christian History Biography}}</ref> Miller himself gradually withdrew from the leadership of the group and died in 1849. His followers called themselves Adventists; the group was often referred to as Millerites by others. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc.– Religious Tolerance.org)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Ellen Harmon (later known by her married name Ellen White) joined with other Adventists, including Joseph Bates, and her husband James White to form a small group of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational and Presbyterian believers in Washington, NH. The church was formally organized as the Seventh-day Adventist Church (1863-MAY-21). She believed that the 1844 prediction was correct, but that it referred to the start of an Investigative Judgment<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.pickle-publishing.com/papers/investigative-judgment.htm |title=A Biblical Basis for the Doctrine of the Investigative Judgment |author=Bob Pickle |publisher=Pickle Publishing}}</ref> This is a time when Christ will judge the dead and the living on earth for righteousness. She predicted that this would soon be followed by the second coming of Jesus. (Seventh-Day Adventist Church – Its Origins, Beliefs and Practices, etc. – Religious Tolerance.org).<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
On October 22, 1844, Christ did purge the sanctuary according to Daniel’s prophecy-but the sanctuary was in heaven, not on earth. Christ’s failure to appear on earth was due to the church’s failure to observe the Sabbath. This tiny group led by James White and his wife, Ellen Gould White, became the Seventh-Day Adventist Church we know today.” (Has the Time Arrived?, Sept, 2001, The Star)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<blockquote><br />
<br />
'''A Prophetic Day Always Equals a Year''' - Miller concluded that all prophetic time-periods in the Bible must be reckoned as ‘a day for a year’ since this concept had been proven true in his own lifetime. In the 1840’s, most American Protestants believed the 1,260 years of the little horn power (Daniel 7:25) terminated in 1798 (Editor’s Note: 1,260 years commenced in 538 A.D. at the “Decree of Emperor Justinian” establishing “Papal Supremacy” and lasted until 1798 A.D. when Pope Pius VI<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12131a.htm |title=Pope Pius VI | publisher=New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref> received his “head wound” (Revelation 13:3, 12, 14) from Napoleon and was placed under house arrest; having died in Valence, France six weeks after his disposition there.). Therefore, they concluded that the 2,300 days (Daniel 8) and the 490 days (70 weeks in Daniel 9) must follow the day/year rule, too. (Larry Wilson, Day Star Publications, The 2300 Days of Daniel 8:14, July/August 1998 – (Larry Wilson, The Star, 1998)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Jehovah's Witnesses and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
When even 1844 did not pan out, some of Miller’s followers abandoned the movement. Many however tried to find a new explanation. They were too embarrassed to admit their error. They had invested too much to be wrong. Ellen G. White eventually led the Seventh-Day Adventists to the conclusion that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1844, and that He would soon make His presence known. Another group that tried to hold to the 1844 date was led by Jonas Swendahl and was known as the Second Adventists. They believed that 1844 marked not the date of Jesus' return, but of the beginning of the last generation. Swendahl taught that Jesus would therefore return in 1874. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914—or 70 years or a lengthy “generation” which “saw the commencement of the INVESTIGATIVE JUDGEMENT” wrought in 1844 (or 1844 + 70 = 1914). (Patrick Zukeran, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Witnessing to the Witnesses, Probe Ministries, Richardson, TX)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
One of Swendahl’s (Second Adventist) followers was a former Presbyterian named Charles Taze Russell.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/witnesses/history/history.shtml |title=Jehovah’s Witnesses | publisher=BBC – Religion and Ethics}}</ref> When 1874 came and went, he concluded 30 years was not long enough for a generation. So he added 70 years to 1844 and concluded that Jesus would return in 1914. This and other differences led him to split from the Second Adventists and launch Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Presence.<ref>{{cite web| title=1908 Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Return| url=http://www.archive.org/details/1908ZionsWatchTowerAndHeraldOfChristsPresence |publisher=Internet Archive}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, ''Zion's Watchtower Tract Society''. His followers became known as the International Bible Students, and they went about the country with the message, ‘Millions now living will never die!’ Followers were to leave their churches and fellowship together. All churches were considered apostate, but God had provided a new channel for their instruction, Zion's Watchtower Tract Society.<ref>{{cite web| title=Harold Camping's Kingdom Hall |url=http://www.scionofzion.com/hall.htm |publisher=Christ Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, UT}}</ref><br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
===Mormonism and the 2300 Days===<br />
<br />
In Mormon Truth(.org) "the best known of all prophecies" is known as "1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church."<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/| title=1844 - Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref> Strengthening the start date of the 2300 days in history has been made by certain Mormon eschatologists. From the 457 B.C. "start date" of the 2300 "year-date" countdown to the end date of 1844 A.D. - but for different reasons: <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Daniel 8:14 gives 2300 years until the cleansing of the sanctuary. What does ‘cleansed’ mean in this context? In the Bible, people are symbolically cleansed by the shedding of blood (animals in the Old Testament, looking forward to the shedding of Jesus’ blood in the New). The Jerusalem Bible rewords this ‘then the sanctuary shall have its rights restored’.(''1844 – Restoring the Rights of the Church'')<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.mormontruth.org/index/|title=1844-Restoring the Rights of the Church}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, we are always looking for the simplest possible interpretation, so we shall assume that this ties in with a similar prophecy in the next chapter (Daniel 9). In Daniel 9, an important prophecy is dated from the time that Persia left Daniel's world - the last major decree for the Jews to return to their land. This date was 457 BC.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
2300 years from 457 BC (remember that there is no ‘year 0’) takes us to 1844.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
The belief in 1844 as a major date in prophecy has been incorporated into modern religions such as the Baha'i faith and the Seventh Day Adventists. In terms of prophetic dates, 1844 was The Big One. Did all those Bible readers get it wrong?<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
So what happened? The world did not end, and everyone went home disappointed. But if they had read the context of the Bible prophecies, they would have seen that although the date was correct, its significance had been missed. 1844 was not the end of the world, but it signaled the restoration of the sanctuary, which is not quite the same thing. While all those people were climbing their hills and selling their worldly goods, looking heavenward in expectation of the end, the ancient prophecy was being fulfilled, right on schedule, in the state of Illinois, in a town called Nauvoo and in a tiny jailhouse called Carthage.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
In 1844, [[Joseph Smith]], the prophet of the restoration, completed his mortal mission. He sealed his testimony with his blood. (See Doctrine & Covenants 135)<ref>{{cite web|title=Doctrine & Covenants 135| url=http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/135| publisher=LDS.org}}</ref> Like all those other martyrs spoken of in Revelation, he was slain for the word of God. All he had ever said was what he had seen with his own eyes, and they killed him for it.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Before the prophet Joseph died, when he could see what was inevitable, he had two driving goals: First, to ensure that the church had everything necessary to survive and prosper. Second, to ensure that the temple (then under construction) would be complete. He died only once he had completed his work. After thousands of years when prophecy had ceased, the church was once more ready to fulfill the will of the Lord. And after thousands of years of there being no temple, or worse, a polluted temple, the rights were at last restored.<br />
The sanctuary had been cleansed. The rights of the temple had been restored. The prophecy was fulfilled. (ibid.) <br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Futurism and Daniel's 2300 Day Prophecy == <br />
<br />
Most Evangelical Futurism-style eschatology affirms that the entire Seventieth Week of Daniel is yet to be fulfilled—it is not in history past. However, their interpretations regarding the 2300 days vary. Juxtaposing their interpretations between the 2300 Days of Daniel 8 and the Seventy Week Prophecy of Daniel 9 is noteworthy.<br />
<br />
Historicism sees the Church as the “sanctuary” to be cleansed (i.e., the “cleansing of the sanctuary” – Daniel 8:13-14); whereas most Futurists see the passages in both Daniel 8 and 9 referring to the Jewish people, Israel of the flesh. They charge that the Historicists, including the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, have made a fundamental assertion that the prophecies found in Daniel 8 and 9 and other places in the Book of Daniel have reference to the “believing people of God” (i.e., today’s Church). However, Premillennialism-style Futurists counter: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24). The “Battle for the Sanctuary” took place in history past between the Hellenizing efforts of Antiochus IV Epiphanes and the Maccabeans (i.e., Jews) between 171 B.C. and 164 B.C. but Antiochus IV Epiphanes was but “a type of the Antichrist of the last days, as well as of all godless world rulers who actively oppose God’s people.”(Spirit-Filled Bible, p. 1133, ref. Daniel 8:9-14)<br />
<br />
Therefore, some within Premillennialism Futurism (Christian eschatology) affirm that the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14 have not yet occurred and refer to the future sacerdotal rites of a yet future [[Third Temple]] to be built during Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks - which also is yet future. The "reign of the Beast" (See: [[Abomination of Desolation]]) commences at the mid-point of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks and thus ensues in "days" (as in the "evening and morning" (Daniel 8:14)) the 1290 days of "desolations" or "abominations" (Daniel 12:12). These "desolations" or "the host to be trampled underfoot" (Daniel 8:13) must be calculated by adding the days of the "daily sacrifices" in a restored Third Temple, yet future, to the "days of desolation" or 1010 (days of sacrifice) + 1290 (days of desolations) = 2300 days: "'How long will the vision be, concerning the '''daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation''', the '''giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot'''?' and he said to me, 'For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.'" These eschatologists conclude that the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks is directed to Jews in a regathered Israel in the "latter days" ("Seventy weeks are determined for '''your people''' and for '''your holy city'''" - Daniel 9:24).<br />
<br />
Donald Barnhouse, [[Hal Lindsey]], John Walvoord and many other premillenarian futurists affirm that the prophecies of the Antichrist and the [[Abomination of Desolation]] are futuristic, based upon the many citations found within Daniel 7-12; likewise, these prophecies were not fulfilled by the destruction of the [[Second Temple]] in 70 AD, which is the claim of [[Preterism]]. Premillennialism-style futurists like Arthur Pink in his classic work "The Antichrist" attribute vast portions within the Old and New Testament to this future figure and see the 1260 days of the first part of the Prophecy of Seventy Weeks as literal days. Doug Krieger, in his e-books entitled ''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/antichrist_intro.htm|title=''Antichrist Reflections on the Desolator''}}</ref> (January 22, 2008) and ''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''<ref>{{cite web| author=Doug Krieger| url=http://www.the-tribulation-network.com/dougkrieger/antichrist/index.htm|title=''Antichrist and the Gog-Magog War''}}</ref> (March 27, 2005) identifies the future Antichrist as the product of Greco-Roman man or a future leader of the West--tracing the portions of Daniel 7 and 8 to the beast of Revelation 11 and 13, ascending from the sea as a composite of a final [[Gentile]] World Power comprised of the same animal-empire descriptions found in Daniel ("Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion" - Revelation 13:2a). <br />
<br />
It is within the context of a future Prophecy of Seventy Weeks that the final week is separated out from the original 69 weeks (just as the first and second comings of Christ have a "gap" - even so, the final week is separated from the original 69 weeks; hence, the "gap"). The final week is broken up into two parts (the initial 1260 days of the prevailing testimony of the [[Two Witnesses]] until the "middle of the week" being the [[Abomination of Desolation]] and the final 1260 days (or 42 months; time, times and half a time; 3.5 days (Rev. 11:9, 11) of the "reign of the Beast" being the latter half of the week, with 30 days until the 1290th day (Daniel 12:11) being the period known as the "Wrath of the Lamb" or "Wrath of God." It is this Beast - now inhabited by Satan as the second "son of perdition" who shall desecrate the [[Third Temple]] and begin his beastly reign for 1,290 days (Daniel 12:11). But, as Antichrist, prior to his reign as the Beast, he will "make a covenant with the many (i.e., Israel’s majority) for one week, but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering" (Daniel 9:27). The final 45 days beyond the 30 days (comprising a total of 75 days beyond the final week of Daniel's Prophecy of Seventy Weeks commences with the Second Coming of Christ and the unveiling of Messiah to Israel prior to the literal Millennium or 1,000-year rule and reign of Messiah - this is the time of "Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty five days" (Daniel 12:13). The 2300 days is part and parcel of these aforementioned time frames - totally integrated into Daniel's Seventieth Week, extending from the commencement of the renewed and rededicated [[Third Temple]] and its sacerdotal rites to 30 days past the close of the Seventieth Week itself.<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,290 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Period of desolations which commence at the “Abomination of Desolation” half-way through the 70th Week<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''+'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Difference between 2,300 less 1,290 = 1,010 Days or “evenings and mornings” of actual sacrifices taking place.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''= 2300 Days'''</big><br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>250 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = Number of days left between the commencement of the first half of Daniel’s 70th Week and the 1,010 days of the actual sacrifices taking place during the first week before the sacrifices are terminated in the midst of Daniel's 70th Week.<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''='''</big> <br />
<blockquote><br />
<big>2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”</big> = 2,300 “evenings and mornings” + 250 “evenings and mornings” = 2,550 Days or “evenings and mornings”<br />
</blockquote><br />
<big>'''or'''</big> (See Below)<br />
'''250 Days (From the commencement of Daniel's 70th Week - Period of Rebuilding the Third Temple) + 1010 Days (Period of Sacrifices) to the "Middle of the Week"''' <br />
'''and the "Abomination of Desolation" + 1290 Days of "Desolations" (Daniel 12:11) (which is equal to 2300 days - i.e., 1010+1290=2300 Days - which is 30 days beyond the conclusion '''of''' Daniel's 70th Week) + 45 Days or unto the 1335th Day (i.e., the period of the "judgment of the nations" and of the "unveiling of Messiah to National Israel" - Daniel 12:12)''' <br />
'''- total numbers of "days" involved: 250+1010+1290+45=2595 Days'''<br />
<br />
G. H. Lang<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Lang| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/lang.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref> presents a resolution to the “year-day” problem (by quoting G. H. Pember<ref>{{cite web| title=G. H. Pember| url=http://www.schoettlepublishing.com/catalog/pember.htm| publisher=Schoettle Publishing Company}}</ref>) of the so-called mandatory “year-day” thesis of the Historicists. <br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
“The words of the angel in regard to the two thousand, three hundred days during which the Sanctuary and the Host are to be trodden underfoot, are, perhaps, not so mysterious as they seem. The literal Hebrew expression is not ‘day,’ but ‘evening-mornings’; that is to say, two thousand, three hundred repetitions of the evening and morning sacrifices—which proves that actual days of twenty-four hours are intended. And we should note, that seven full prophetic years would contain two thousand five hundred and twenty days. (G. H. Lang, The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117—taken from Pember’s Great Prophecies, p. 127-8)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
Now, as we shall see when we consider the revelation of the Seventy Sevens, the antichrist is to make a covenant with the majority of the Jewish nation for Seven Years, at the close of which period he will be destroyed by the appearing of the Lord. It would seem, then, that he will not tamper with the Sanctuary, until the two hundred and twenty-first day from the date of the commencement of the covenant; indeed, it is possible that the building of the Temple may not be completed until that time. Perhaps, the two thousand three hundred days may represent the whole time of his personal connection with the City and Sanctuary. The actual suppression of the daily sacrifices will not take place, as we shall presently see, until three years and a half of the covenant-period have passed by.” (G. H. Pember, Great Prophecies, pp. 127-8, from G. H. Lang’s The Histories and Prophecies of Daniel, p. 117)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
Substantiating Lang’s thesis on the 2300 days:<br />
<br />
<blockquote><br />
''To finish transgression'' in Daniel 9:24 is directly related to the ''Transgression of Desolation'' in Daniel 8:13 and the 2300 days from the commencement of the “daily sacrifices” until “the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot.” The 2300 day calculations must be understood by comparing these Scriptures with those in Daniel 11:31 (“. . . then they shall take away the daily sacrifices, and place there the abomination of desolation”); and with those found in Daniel 12:11-12 (“And from the time that the daily sacrifice is taken away, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there shall be one thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days); and, finally all of these passages must be correlated with Daniel 9:27 (“Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week; but in the middle of the week he shall bring an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall be one who makes desolate, even until the consummation, which is determined, is poured out on the desolator.”). (Israel’s Prophetic Witness<ref>{{cite web| title=Israel's Prophetic Witness| url=http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:eUnQ8tDiBt4J:www.the-tribulation-network.com/ebooks/antichrist_reflections_on_the_desolator/israels_prophetic_witness.htm+The+Tribulation+Network+2300+Days+Millerites&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us| author=Doug Krieger| publisher=The Tribulation Network}}</ref>)<br />
</blockquote><br />
<br />
The fact that Jesus quotes Daniel’s prophecy of the “Abomination of Desolation” as yet future, adds credibility to its futurity (See Daniel 8:11-14; 9:24-27; 11:20-45; 12:1-13). These passages are not fulfilled in part or the whole (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14) as foreseen by Jesus. Furthermore, the writings of John in the Revelation, according to Futurism, claims that Preterism must resort to bending the writing of John’s Revelation prior to 70 A.D., instead of its post-70 A.D. writing under the persecution of Emperor Domitian (81 A.D. – 96 A.D.), which makes the 70 A.D. date of the “Abomination of Desolation” chronologically impossible; and, a whole host of Revelation’s precisions obsolete or, at best, allegorized by the Amillennialism.<br />
<br />
The passages in Daniel 8 through 12, according these futurists refer to National Israel, not exclusively to the Church (Daniel 8:14—“then the sanctuary shall be cleansed”); likewise is their understanding of this “cleansing” directly associated with the second advent of Christ, which indeed is the case (but His cleansing of the temple is directly connected with Daniel 12:12 and the 1,335th Day); however, its implications concerning Israel’s ramifications are wholly disregarded—for in their eyes, the book of Daniel, in the main, excludes the “previous” “your people and for your holy city” (Daniel 9:24—i.e., the Jews) and, based upon the Amillenarian backgrounds of these original proponents of Adventism and ultimately Jehovah’s Witnesses and even Mormonism, they wholly appropriate all the promises made to National Israel, and, like St. Augustine, Origen, and other eschatological systems of interpretation (i.e., the Postmillennialism, Preterists) simply configured a belief systems which borders on, or explicitly embraces, suppercessionism.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist|2}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Eschatology]]</div>Kriegerdwm