Statue of Daniel 2 (Abrahamic only)

[BlandOatmeal]

Well yes, the Roman empire is considered the most successful empire in the western world. All the countries in western europe considered themselves the inheritors of that greatness.

Hi, Franklin.

You've just made a statement that not many people can legitimately argue against. That said, there seems to be some unspoken agenda -- not in you, but in most others -- opposed to seriously considering the book of Daniel.

The statue prophecy, taken to its most logical conclusion, speaks about the coming of an everlasting kingdom, that will destroy and supplant the kingdoms of the world. In some countries, teaching this sort of thing can wind one up in jail and worse; but that is what the prophecy points to. Would you agree?

It's pretty clear, what this is about:

Daniel 2
[42] And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
[43] And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
[44] And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
[45] Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

These words are not about something that happened in Daniel's time (when the Roman Republic didn't even exist yet, and Greece was a virtual nonentity), nor at the time of some of the postulated "later" Daniels (from Maccabean times), nor in Roman times (which lasted until 1453), nor at any time in history even up to this day -- simply because the kingdoms of the world have not been destroyed and replaced with a kingdom made "without hands". That is why I have been looking at CONTEMPORARY history, for an explanation of the "ten toes", etc.

I think I've been pretty straightforward in the rough outline of who those ten nations are, and also of the "little horn" that was to rise among them and become great -- namely, to become a singular superpower, surpassing all powers that have come before her -- namely, the United States of America.

If this is what Daniel is saying, it has serious implications concerning our lives. Why, do you suppose, is there so little apparent interest in these matters. Is it because people think they'll be "raptured" out of all their worries? Do people believe that if they don't think about these things, or don't talk about them, they won't happen? Or is there a sound scriptural argument that says these things are somehow for another time or place?

Those are actual questions, by the way, not rhetorical ones. What do you suppose?

PS. If you think the prophecy is about heavy metal (gold, silver, etc) and "rock" and roll, please think again. My son and I have already gone over that possibility.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Hi, Franklin.

You've just made a statement that not many people can legitimately argue against. That said, there seems to be some unspoken agenda -- not in you, but in most others -- opposed to seriously considering the book of Daniel.

The statue prophecy, taken to its most logical conclusion, speaks about the coming of an everlasting kingdom, that will destroy and supplant the kingdoms of the world. In some countries, teaching this sort of thing can wind one up in jail and worse; but that is what the prophecy points to. Would you agree?

It's pretty clear, what this is about:

Daniel 2
[42] And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
[43] And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
[44] And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
[45] Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

These words are not about something that happened in Daniel's time (when the Roman Republic didn't even exist yet, and Greece was a virtual nonentity), nor at the time of some of the postulated "later" Daniels (from Maccabean times), nor in Roman times (which lasted until 1453), nor at any time in history even up to this day -- simply because the kingdoms of the world have not been destroyed and replaced with a kingdom made "without hands". That is why I have been looking at CONTEMPORARY history, for an explanation of the "ten toes", etc.

I think I've been pretty straightforward in the rough outline of who those ten nations are, and also of the "little horn" that was to rise among them and become great -- namely, to become a singular superpower, surpassing all powers that have come before her -- namely, the United States of America.

If this is what Daniel is saying, it has serious implications concerning our lives. Why, do you suppose, is there so little apparent interest in these matters. Is it because people think they'll be "raptured" out of all their worries? Do people believe that if they don't think about these things, or don't talk about them, they won't happen? Or is there a sound scriptural argument that says these things are somehow for another time or place?

Those are actual questions, by the way, not rhetorical ones. What do you suppose?

PS. If you think the prophecy is about heavy metal (gold, silver, etc) and "rock" and roll, please think again. My son and I have already gone over that possibility.

I certainly do not see it as such (the rock and roll thing).

I am however hard pressed to say that it is a prophecy. I also have to read up on the difference between the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, because it seems that in many ways the Empire was the part that would be considered mixed of clay and iron and even after it's "collapse" in around 486 C.E. (I'm probably off) it still existed for years afterwards which would include those 10 nations (though even if it was really 10 can be up to debate city states and countries probably rose and fell rather liberally during that time).

 

[BlandOatmeal]

I certainly do not see it as such (the rock and roll thing).

I am however hard pressed to say that it is a prophecy. I also have to read up on the difference between the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, because it seems that in many ways the Empire was the part that would be considered mixed of clay and iron and even after it's "collapse" in around 486 C.E. (I'm probably off) it still existed for years afterwards which would include those 10 nations (though even if it was really 10 can be up to debate city states and countries probably rose and fell rather liberally during that time).

That would be good reading. I just took a semester of Roman History. Essentially, dictators were elected for one-year terms during times of crisis, after which things returned to their republican norm. One dictator named Sulla extended this period for himself, because the situation seemed to demand it.

As the Republic grew, and slave-holding senators began to force small farmers off their lands into the city, a rabble began to form in Rome. They would be placated with welfare programs and Monday night football. Candidates for office would openly bribe voters by offering them bigger and bloodier games; but this began to be expensive, and candidates got deeply in debt. When Caesar was conquering Gaul, his fellow senators in Rome were preparing a welcome for him: charges of corruption, or some other money-related matters. He was deeply in debt, and had no way out of the mess other than marching on Rome and taking over the city.

After Caesar took over the Republic with what essentially was a permanent dictatorship, he kept up the sham elections. There was so much flattery, bribery and coercion going around, that the senate got used to strong-man leadership. They kept re-electing Caesar, and piled offices and honors on him. Technically, Julius Caesar wasn't even an autocrat, but an elected official. Under Augustus, this continued; but eventually the "republicanism" became more of a farce with every succeeding caesar; and succeeding caesars became progressively more insane.

The bottom line is that this was a gradual process. However you figure it out, though, you have to simply throw out much of Daniel in order to see these as anything BUT prophecies of the times we live in. The fact that there were two parallel prophecies, one with ten horns and the other with ten toes, both representing the same thing, shows how certain this twice-repeated prophecy was. In the dreams Joseph interpreted in Genesis, there were also two parallel dreams; and the fact that the dream was repeated was interpreted as demonstrating its certainty -- this wasn't for example, a prophecy that people might cause to pass over them because of repentance (as Jonah's prophecy to Nineveh); it is certain to come to pass.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

That would be good reading. I just took a semester of Roman History. Essentially, dictators were elected for one-year terms during times of crisis, after which things returned to their republican norm. One dictator named Sulla extended this period for himself, because the situation seemed to demand it.

As the Republic grew, and slave-holding senators began to force small farmers off their lands into the city, a rabble began to form in Rome. They would be placated with welfare programs and Monday night football. Candidates for office would openly bribe voters by offering them bigger and bloodier games; but this began to be expensive, and candidates got deeply in debt. When Caesar was conquering Gaul, his fellow senators in Rome were preparing a welcome for him: charges of corruption, or some other money-related matters. He was deeply in debt, and had no way out of the mess other than marching on Rome and taking over the city.

After Caesar took over the Republic with what essentially was a permanent dictatorship, he kept up the sham elections. There was so much flattery, bribery and coercion going around, that the senate got used to strong-man leadership. They kept re-electing Caesar, and piled offices and honors on him. Technically, Julius Caesar wasn't even an autocrat, but an elected official. Under Augustus, this continued; but eventually the "republicanism" became more of a farce with every succeeding caesar; and succeeding caesars became progressively more insane.

The bottom line is that this was a gradual process. However you figure it out, though, you have to simply throw out much of Daniel in order to see these as anything BUT prophecies of the times we live in. The fact that there were two parallel prophecies, one with ten horns and the other with ten toes, both representing the same thing, shows how certain this twice-repeated prophecy was. In the dreams Joseph interpreted in Genesis, there were also two parallel dreams; and the fact that the dream was repeated was interpreted as demonstrating its certainty -- this wasn't for example, a prophecy that people might cause to pass over them because of repentance (as Jonah's prophecy to Nineveh); it is certain to come to pass.

Ah so you note the similarity to the story of Joseph lol.

Mind you our big difference is that I don't take certain stories in the Bible to be literal tellings of history, so I will admit that I am biased.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Ah so you note the similarity to the story of Joseph lol.

Mind you our big difference is that I don't take certain stories in the Bible to be literal tellings of history, so I will admit that I am biased.

I'm not quite sure what you meant here. The interpretation of the "statue" prophecy certainly isn't being presented as "history" -- it's being presented as the foretelling of future events. This can't be what you're referring to. If you mean that you don't accept the historicity of Daniel himself, that is irrelevant to the things we are discussing. We are concerned with the things that are WRITTEN in the book; and they were certainly written by the late 2nd Century BCE:

"The Dead Sea Scrolls have lifted their voice in this controversy. Due to the amount of Daniel fragments found in various caves near Qumran, it appears that this prophetic book was one of the most treasured by that community. Perhaps the popularity of Daniel was due to the fact that the people of Qumran lived during the anxious period in which many of these prophecies actually were being fulfilled. For whatever reason, Daniel was peculiarly safeguarded to the extent that we have at our disposal parts of all chapters of Daniel, except chapters 9 and 12. However, one manuscript (4QDanc; 4 = Cave 4; Q = Qumran; Danc = one of the Daniel fragments arbitrarily designated “c” for clarification), published in November 1989, has been dated to the late second century [SIZE=-1]B.C.[/SIZE] (see Hasel, 1992, 5[2]:47). Two other major documents (4QDanb, 4QDana) have been published since 1987, and contribute to scholarly analysis of Daniel. These recently released fragments have direct bearing on the integrity and authenticity of the book of Daniel."

-- https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=357

You have been trying to interpret Daniel's writings, specifically chapter 2, to having been fulfilled in the time of the Roman Empire, which began no sooner than 31 BCE. Since that chapter was clearly written before 100 BCE, it obviously was not presented as "history", so I'm confused about what you're trying to say.

PS. I've updated the "Book of Revelation" thread at http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...cies-book-rev-abrahamic-only.html#post3603518

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I'm not quite sure what you meant here. The interpretation of the "statue" prophecy certainly isn't being presented as "history" -- it's being presented as the foretelling of future events. This can't be what you're referring to. If you mean that you don't accept the historicity of Daniel himself, that is irrelevant to the things we are discussing. We are concerned with the things that are WRITTEN in the book; and they were certainly written by the late 2nd Century BCE:

"The Dead Sea Scrolls have lifted their voice in this controversy. Due to the amount of Daniel fragments found in various caves near Qumran, it appears that this prophetic book was one of the most treasured by that community. Perhaps the popularity of Daniel was due to the fact that the people of Qumran lived during the anxious period in which many of these prophecies actually were being fulfilled. For whatever reason, Daniel was peculiarly safeguarded to the extent that we have at our disposal parts of all chapters of Daniel, except chapters 9 and 12. However, one manuscript (4QDanc; 4 = Cave 4; Q = Qumran; Danc = one of the Daniel fragments arbitrarily designated “c” for clarification), published in November 1989, has been dated to the late second century [SIZE=-1]B.C.[/SIZE] (see Hasel, 1992, 5[2]:47). Two other major documents (4QDanb, 4QDana) have been published since 1987, and contribute to scholarly analysis of Daniel. These recently released fragments have direct bearing on the integrity and authenticity of the book of Daniel."

-- https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=357

You have been trying to interpret Daniel's writings, specifically chapter 2, to having been fulfilled in the time of the Roman Empire, which began no sooner than 31 BCE. Since that chapter was clearly written before 100 BCE, it obviously was not presented as "history", so I'm confused about what you're trying to say.

PS. I've updated the "Book of Revelation" thread at http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...cies-book-rev-abrahamic-only.html#post3603518

I'm saying that I don't believe it to be an actual prophecy because it would be hard press to actually narrow it down to a particular group and event. For instance we say that the empire of Babylon was the head of Gold, but the Assyrian Empire lasted longer than the Babylonian and the Roman Empire is among the most successful empires if not the most successful in the western world. In the Eastern world and modern history though the Babylonian Empire and most if not all Western Empires pale in comparison to the huge empire constructed by Ghengis Khan that lasted for several generations. There is also the Arab Empire that grew and contended for years against the Christian Empire in the west. Lets not forget the unification of China and the large expanses that it did. And would we consider Russia part of the Roman Empire as well?

 

[BlandOatmeal]

I'm saying that I don't believe it to be an actual prophecy because it would be hard press to actually narrow it down to a particular group and event. For instance we say that the empire of Babylon was the head of Gold, but the Assyrian Empire lasted longer than the Babylonian and the Roman Empire is among the most successful empires if not the most successful in the western world. In the Eastern world and modern history though the Babylonian Empire and most if not all Western Empires pale in comparison to the huge empire constructed by Ghengis Khan that lasted for several generations. There is also the Arab Empire that grew and contended for years against the Christian Empire in the west. Lets not forget the unification of China and the large expanses that it did. And would we consider Russia part of the Roman Empire as well?

The "head of gold" was explicitly shown to be Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, so there can be no doubt of its identity. The idea that "biggest is best", apparently, which you are conveying, was apparently not shared by either Daniel or King Nebuchadnezzar.

The Greeks thought similarly. According to Hesiod, we have:

1. Golden Age -- during the time of Chronus, a mythcal Titan with no known territory
2. Silver Age -- during the time of Zeus: Like Chronus, he was not a historical figure
3. Bronze Age -- "...terrible and strong. They loved the lamentable works of Ares and deeds of violence; they ate no bread, but were hard of heart like adamant, fearful men. Great was their strength and unconquerable the arms which grew from their shoulders on their strong limbs..." (The Bronze Age or Bronze Race)
4. Hroic Age -- "nobler and more righteous, a god-like race of hero-men who are called demi-gods, the race before our own, throughout the boundless earth. Grim war and dread battle destroyed a part of them..." (ibid)
   
5. Iron Age -- "...men never rest from labour and sorrow by day, and from perishing by night; and the gods shall lay sore trouble upon them..." (ibid)
   

To the Greeks, size didn't matter. The Golden Age was more godlike, the Iron Age the most earthy. I am of the opinion that the age we live in is the least Godlike and earthiest of all -- which is why people of our day consider possession of wealth and power to do violence as a postitive indicator (Note our kids' TV heroes), not to mention sexual prowess, (viz Kennedy and Clinton).

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

The "head of gold" was explicitly shown to be Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, so there can be no doubt of its identity. The idea that "biggest is best", apparently, which you are conveying, was apparently not shared by either Daniel or King Nebuchadnezzar.

The Greeks thought similarly. According to Hesiod, we have:

1. Golden Age -- during the time of Chronus, a mythcal Titan with no known territory
2. Silver Age -- during the time of Zeus: Like Chronus, he was not a historical figure
3. Bronze Age -- "...terrible and strong. They loved the lamentable works of Ares and deeds of violence; they ate no bread, but were hard of heart like adamant, fearful men. Great was their strength and unconquerable the arms which grew from their shoulders on their strong limbs..." (The Bronze Age or Bronze Race)
4. Hroic Age -- "nobler and more righteous, a god-like race of hero-men who are called demi-gods, the race before our own, throughout the boundless earth. Grim war and dread battle destroyed a part of them..." (ibid)
   
5. Iron Age -- "...men never rest from labour and sorrow by day, and from perishing by night; and the gods shall lay sore trouble upon them..." (ibid)
   

To the Greeks, size didn't matter. The Golden Age was more godlike, the Iron Age the most earthy. I am of the opinion that the age we live in is the least Godlike and earthiest of all -- which is why people of our day consider possession of wealth and power to do violence as a postitive indicator (Note our kids' TV heroes), not to mention sexual prowess, (viz Kennedy and Clinton).

Not biggest is Best, but biggest is most successful. The Assyrian Empire was far more efficient, longer lasting, and successful than the Babylonian Empire as was the Persian and Roman Empire (not sure about Greek).

Also from what I remember about the Greeks from my ancient religions course, the time of Chronus though called a Golden Age, was not necessarily considered better. You can also tell by the mythology of Chronus's demise that he was not one who they were fond of.

As well throughout history those who entertain have been looked at as "heroes" I think the difference between back in the time of the ancient greeks "Kids today are the worst they have ever been" -Aristotle is that now what was once left for the wealthy is open to the poor and television makes it far more reaching. As for our leaders, you seem to have a fairly indepth knowledge of history, how many leaders can we say were on the same level as Kennedy and Clinton in recorded history?

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Not biggest is Best, but biggest is most successful. The Assyrian Empire was far more efficient, longer lasting, and successful than the Babylonian Empire as was the Persian and Roman Empire (not sure about Greek).

Also from what I remember about the Greeks from my ancient religions course, the time of Chronus though called a Golden Age, was not necessarily considered better. You can also tell by the mythology of Chronus's demise that he was not one who they were fond of.

As well throughout history those who entertain have been looked at as "heroes" I think the difference between back in the time of the ancient greeks "Kids today are the worst they have ever been" -Aristotle is that now what was once left for the wealthy is open to the poor and television makes it far more reaching. As for our leaders, you seem to have a fairly in depth knowledge of history, how many leaders can we say were on the same level as Kennedy and Clinton in recorded history?

Franklin, pursue whatever tack you want on this. If you launder the scriptures enough, you can get them to be completely meaningless and disconnected from your life. I don't see them this way: Daniel 2 explicitly talks of these prophecies as applying to the end times, and to the commencement of the Messianic Kingdom. Any explanation of their fulfillment before that time is simply inconsistent.

The ten kings are end-time kingdoms arising out of the old Roman Empire, as Daniel 2 says. They can only be the European powers, which were all ruled by ruling houses from the time of Charlemagne and his descendants. They all clove to one another not only through marriage (all of them were related closely, usually as third cousins or closer), but also by convening congresses to decide weighty matters, oppose common enemies and divide the spoils. I have listed these. Moreover, they ruled almost the entire population of the world as colonies, protectorates and spheres of influence.

The "little horn" of Daniel 7, who was to arise from and among those ten, therefore, was clearly the greatest power of our day, the Post-Colonial era, since WWII. That this is the time of the culmination of these prophecies is further buttressed by the fact that Israel has been restored to the Holy Land and is prospering there. As for the "ten", they are ALL now associated with the Superpower (the United States of America) through NATO, either as full members or (in the case of Russia) as "Partners for Peace". They are also associated in the UN, the G-20 and many other organizations -- organizations, the like of which have never existed on such a scale.

Please note this: ANY interpretation of the "ten toes" that does not have them ruling CONTEMPORANEOUSLY with each other must be discarded, whether Roman times, Greek times or modern times; because Daniel 2 clearly says that they will reign and work together during the same time period. This has simply never happened until today.

As I said, we are completely at liberty, to discard scriptures according to our liking; but in doing so, we lose all the benefit of them. Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 are warnings to us TODAY, not to put our trust in earthly powers; because they will be DESTROYED with the coming of the Messianic Kingdom. Christians are mostly ignorant of this fact, and instead pray that God will somehow raise up their countries as "Christian nations." HE WILL NOT. He will destroy those nations: The time has come, and He will do it. The prophecy was repeated twice in Daniel (and yet again in Revelation), to tell us that the matter has been definitely decided.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Franklin, pursue whatever tack you want on this. If you launder the scriptures enough, you can get them to be completely meaningless and disconnected from your life. I don't see them this way: Daniel 2 explicitly talks of these prophecies as applying to the end times, and to the commencement of the Messianic Kingdom. Any explanation of their fulfillment before that time is simply inconsistent.

The ten kings are end-time kingdoms arising out of the old Roman Empire, as Daniel 2 says. They can only be the European powers, which were all ruled by ruling houses from the time of Charlemagne and his descendants. They all clove to one another not only through marriage (all of them were related closely, usually as third cousins or closer), but also by convening congresses to decide weighty matters, oppose common enemies and divide the spoils. I have listed these. Moreover, they ruled almost the entire population of the world as colonies, protectorates and spheres of influence.

The "little horn" of Daniel 7, who was to arise from and among those ten, therefore, was clearly the greatest power of our day, the Post-Colonial era, since WWII. That this is the time of the culmination of these prophecies is further buttressed by the fact that Israel has been restored to the Holy Land and is prospering there. As for the "ten", they are ALL now associated with the Superpower (the United States of America) through NATO, either as full members or (in the case of Russia) as "Partners for Peace". They are also associated in the UN, the G-20 and many other organizations -- organizations, the like of which have never existed on such a scale.

Please note this: ANY interpretation of the "ten toes" that does not have them ruling CONTEMPORANEOUSLY with each other must be discarded, whether Roman times, Greek times or modern times; because Daniel 2 clearly says that they will reign and work together during the same time period. This has simply never happened until today.

As I said, we are completely at liberty, to discard scriptures according to our liking; but in doing so, we lose all the benefit of them. Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 are warnings to us TODAY, not to put our trust in earthly powers; because they will be DESTROYED with the coming of the Messianic Kingdom. Christians are mostly ignorant of this fact, and instead pray that God will somehow raise up their countries as "Christian nations." HE WILL NOT. He will destroy those nations: The time has come, and He will do it. The prophecy was repeated twice in Daniel (and yet again in Revelation), to tell us that the matter has been definitely decided.

No one is discarding scripture, because I do not agree with your attempt to seemingly indicate that the toes where the Roman Empire after its dissolution does not mean I'm discarding scripture. I just don't see it as prophetic. Mostly because you still haven't shown historically what nation those ten toes were. How exactly would the other nation The Persian Empire not greater than the Babylonian? The Empire that destroyed Judah lasted around 100 or so years, Persia lasted for almost 200, the Assyrian Empire before Babylon also lasted longer. You haven't accounted for Russia, and other civilizations that have developed. How do you account for the Greek Empire which even during the middle ages apparently was considered the Byzantine Empire. As for it being repeated in Revelations, a large amount of the imagery drawn from Revelations is imagery drawn from the book of Daniel and the Book of Enoch, books that have long standing apocalyptic tones.

Then there is the fact that Daniel is not considered a Prophet in Judaism...why...who knows. BUT maybe that's a clue.

And then you have the literary framing device that Daniel has in many similarities to the story of Joseph.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Hi, Franklin

No one is discarding scripture, because I do not agree with your attempt to seemingly indicate that the toes where the Roman Empire after its dissolution does not mean I'm discarding scripture.

If you indeed do not discard scripture, you will make me one of the happiest people in the world; because I don't think I know many, if any, who do not.

From the way you've worded the above, it seems you are of the opinion that the SCRIPTURES THEMSELVES do not indicate that the toes indicate the Roman Empire AFTER its dissolution. Here are some items you seem to have missed. First of all, let me re-post Nebuchadnezzar's dream:

Daniel 2
[31] Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.
[32] This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
[33] His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
[34] Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.

1. The statue represented Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom of Babylon, and great powers that would successively replace it in turn. The feet and toes, therefore, represented the chronologically LAST of these great kingdoms before the FINAL DESTRUCTION of ALL earthly power. All of the kingdoms were to be destroyed at that time -- including Babylon, Persia, Bactria and the Indus Valley. Babylon was only held briefly by the Romans, in 117 AD; and Persia never was, not to mention the others.
2. The "dissolution of Rome", whenever you believe that was, was not by a "rock made without hands", as told in Daniel's dream. Rome was, in every possible "dissolution"scenario, overcome by human powers and ultimately replaced by other earthly powers: Roman Caesars, Goths, Lombards, Franks, Turks, what have you.
3. The kingdom established by the "Rock", which replaced all earthly power, was to last forever. Those Roman Caesars, Goths, Lombards, Franks, Turks, etc., along with the Parthians, Kushans, etc. who took over in Babylon and parts east, have not ruled forever: They have all been destroyed, in turn, themselves; and the powers that succeeded them, such as the Arabs, the Mongols, the Nazis, the British and the Communists, certainly do not represent an "eternal" kingdom from out of heaven.

All of this indicates that the destruction of the toes, and with it the destruction of the entire statue, HAS NOT HAPPENED YET. We are NOT living in the eternal, Messianic Kingdom.

Do you think that the Christian Church is that eternal kingdom? If so, then the church had to have overthrown Rome and the other kingdoms with violence. I do not see this as having taken place. Please explain to me, therefore, how you can view any of the explanations you have given, as not contradicting the explanation given in Daniel.

I just don't see it as prophetic. Mostly because you still haven't shown historically what nation those ten toes were.

I assume you mean "prophetic" in the English Language understanding of that word, and not in the Talmudic understanding. I have explained over and over, what that nation is that would replace the Roman Empire. That's OVER AND OVER, as in OVER AND OVER. It seems you're trying to wear me down with repetitive postings that you refuse to read.

Let me do this yet again: The successor of the Roman Republic was the Roman Empire. This divided into an eastern part, ultimately called the Byzantine Empire, which was replaced by the Ottomans, and a western part, which was overthrown by a succession of barbarian kingdoms: first the Ostrogoths, then the Lombards, then the Franks. Ultimately, one King of the Franks, namely, Karl der Gross or Charlemagne, was proclaimed "Holy Roman Emperor", based on the "Donation of Constantine". The time of this event was 800 AD, while the Byzantine Empire continued to exist. By the time of the overthrow of the Byzantines at Constantinople by the Turks in 1453, the empire of Charlemagne had been divide many times and parcelled out to his descendants and supporters. These later became the ruling houses of Europe.

Some of the principal of such houses were:

1. The House of Hanover, from whence came King George III, whom the American colonies rebelled against, and Victoria, Queeen of Great Britain and Empress of India, whose daughters produced the rulers of both Britain and Germany during the First World War.
2. The House Wettin, which ruled Saxony and Poland; and its cadet house of Saxe-Coburg Gotha, which produced Victoria's consort Albert, and though him the present-day rulers of the UK, Canada, Australia, etc. as well as Leopold of Belgium (who personally owned the Congo Free State), and the kings of Portugal and Bulgaria
3. The House of Hohenzollern, which produced the German Kaiser and King of Romania
4. The House of Hapsburg-Lorraine, which produced the rulers of Tuscany and Austria--the latter of whose domains included Belgium, Venice, Milan, Hungary, Bohemia and even, briefly, Mexico. The House of Hapsburg, which it replaced, had at one time ruled the Spanish and Portugese Empires, along with the Dutch and their possessions
5. The Robertian Houses of Capet and Burgundy. From the latter came the kings of Portugal; and from the former came the Bourbon kings of France, Spain, etc.
6. The House of Savoy, from which came the Kings of Italy and elsewhere
7. The House of Oldenburg, from which derived the Tsars of Russia, the Kings of Scandanavia and Greece and Britain's Prince Charles
8. The House of Orange-Nassau, from which derived the rulers of the Netherlands, who ruled, at one time or another, Indonesia, Taiwan, Sri Lanka, and possessions in America
9. The House of Wittelsbach, which ruled Bavaria and contributed to many royal houses such as the present ruler of Sweden
10. The Houses of Wurttemburg, Mecklenburg, etc., which produced consorts for the Tsars of Russia and other European rulers.

(continued on next post)

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Please don't ask me again, to have to detail this to you. The Byzantine Empire was replaced by the Ottomans, who did not produce ten prominent kings, nor even a dynasty to continue in the home country of Turkey. Neither did the Parthians produce such a company, nor their Persian successors, nor the Bactrians of Afghanistan, nor the Kushans, etc. Neither did these nor the Mongols claim any inheritance in Rome.

During the colonial era, from the mid-1700s to the mid-1900s, the HRE-derived houses of Europe held sway over the whole world, the principal empires being:

1. The British Empire
2. The Russian Empire
3. The German Empire
4. The Austrian Empire
5. The French Empire
6. The Italian Empire
7. The Spanish Empire
8. The Dutch Empire
9. The Kingdom of Belgium and possessions
10. The Kingdom of Denmark and possessions

Those empires directly ruled from Siberia and Alaska, to India, to Africa, to America, to Australia; had protectorates over all of the rest of North Africa, the Middle East (except Turkey, Iran and parts of Arabia), Afghanistan, Nepal, Bhutan and the Pacific Islands, occupied Iran and Mecca, controlled the commerce of China and, along with the United States, were completely victorious in a war that engulfed the entire world.

The above have now been replaced by NATO and its associated Partners for Peace; led by the US, the world's only superpower.

Please don't say again, that I have never spelled this out.

How exactly would the other nation The Persian Empire not greater than the Babylonian?

Because Daniel said it was not. They are the kingdom that succeeded Babylon, which Daniel said would be inferior to it.

The Empire that destroyed Judah lasted around 100 or so years,

According to Jeremiah, the captivity of Judah was to last 70 years. Historically, this was the period between Jehoiachin's carrying away into Babylon until the Decree of Cyrus of Persia allowing the Jews to return to Judah.

Persia lasted for almost 200, the Assyrian Empire before Babylon also lasted longer.

Assyria preceded Nebuchadnezzar, and therefore was not part of his dream of "things to come".

You haven't accounted for Russia, and other civilizations that have developed.

In some posts, I was still undecided about Russia. I have certainly accounted for it and those "others" in this post.

How do you account for the Greek Empire which even during the middle ages apparently was considered the Byzantine Empire.

The Byzantines were entirely overthrown by the Ottomans in 1453. In 1830, Greece won its independence and was ruled by a scion of the House of Oldenburg. Britain's Duke of Edinburgh comes from that house, which was of German-Roman origin, not Greek.

As for it being repeated in Revelations, a large amount of the imagery drawn from Revelations is imagery drawn from the book of Daniel and the Book of Enoch, books that have long standing apocalyptic tones.

I have said before, that I refuse to discuss the Book of Revelation here. The Jews don't accept that book, and I want them to feel welcome in this discussion. If you want to discuss Rev, please post HERE.

Then there is the fact that Daniel is not considered a Prophet in Judaism...why...who knows. BUT maybe that's a clue.

That has been gone over and over here. The Jews DO consider him a prophet in the ENGLISH LANGUAGE sense, which you and most readers here understand. His position in the Jewish canon is not defined in English, but in Talmudic Hebrew. Hardly any readers here even know what the Jewish canon is.

And then you have the literary framing device that Daniel has in many similarities to the story of Joseph.

That Daniel is similar to Joseph is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Are you proposing that Daniel prophesied about ancient Egypt?

Lunch is on the table. Thank you for discussing these things with me.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

I hope I haven't overdone it, Franklin. I just wanted to let you know that I have thought over the things you thought I'd missed -- and indeed, that I've pretty much posted them.

Concerning Joseph, the account of him was strictly historical, or back-looking, from the reader's point of view. His interpretation of Pharaoh's dreams provided the reason for the first captivity of Israel. The book of Daniel was written during the second captivity of Israel, along with Ezekiel, 1&2 Chronicles, Ezra and other books. Their purpose was to assure the Israelites that this captivity also had a purpose and was ordained of God, and that there was to be an unbroken continuation of God's relationship with the Jewish people, DESPITE its captivities.

The wrapup of not only these books, but of the captivities themselves, was to bring assurance to the Jewish people in the Great Captivity to come, 1800 years of life in the Galut before the Jews would be restored to Israel.

You mentioned the similarity between Joseph and Daniel. That was certainly intentional on God's part, so the Jews would link the two captivities in their minds and take hope from them. The message is: You've been through this before, and you've come out of it; don't lose faith.

I think I've done as thorough a job as possible in this format, to deal with the details of the prophecy, and how they are explicitly shown in the scripture to point to the present day and what will shortly come to pass, the Messianic Age. Having done that, the prophecy is no more than a meaningless intellectual exercise if we don't see God's point in it all. It's purpose is to give us hope, as we live through OUR captivity as Daniel lived through his. That is the MAIN reason I have been convinced, since the day I first read Daniel, that this was not meant any other way. The details have been coming to me gradually, as the day draws close for their fulfillment.

I hope I haven't blown you away; that was never my intent. :no:

Shalom shalom

PS. The captivity in Egypt, as well as that of the Northern Kingdom into Assyria, are probably touched upon in Revelation; but as I've said, I will not discuss that book on this thread.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I hope I haven't overdone it, Franklin. I just wanted to let you know that I have thought over the things you thought I'd missed -- and indeed, that I've pretty much posted them.

Concerning Joseph, the account of him was strictly historical, or back-looking, from the reader's point of view. His interpretation of Pharaoh's dreams provided the reason for the first captivity of Israel. The book of Daniel was written during the second captivity of Israel, along with Ezekiel, 1&2 Chronicles, Ezra and other books. Their purpose was to assure the Israelites that this captivity also had a purpose and was ordained of God, and that there was to be an unbroken continuation of God's relationship with the Jewish people, DESPITE its captivities.

The wrapup of not only these books, but of the captivities themselves, was to bring assurance to the Jewish people in the Great Captivity to come, 1800 years of life in the Galut before the Jews would be restored to Israel.

You mentioned the similarity between Joseph and Daniel. That was certainly intentional on God's part, so the Jews would link the two captivities in their minds and take hope from them. The message is: You've been through this before, and you've come out of it; don't lose faith.

I think I've done as thorough a job as possible in this format, to deal with the details of the prophecy, and how they are explicitly shown in the scripture to point to the present day and what will shortly come to pass, the Messianic Age. Having done that, the prophecy is no more than a meaningless intellectual exercise if we don't see God's point in it all. It's purpose is to give us hope, as we live through OUR captivity as Daniel lived through his. That is the MAIN reason I have been convinced, since the day I first read Daniel, that this was not meant any other way. The details have been coming to me gradually, as the day draws close for their fulfillment.

I hope I haven't blown you away; that was never my intent. :no:

Shalom shalom

PS. The captivity in Egypt, as well as that of the Northern Kingdom into Assyria, are probably touched upon in Revelation; but as I've said, I will not discuss that book on this thread.

Nah you haven't lol.

I'll have to research my ancient history as well before I can come up with rebuttals.

Though as a side joke it's good to know that it's mostly the Caucasian countries that are going to go under, us Minorities are pretty much good to go

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Nah you haven't lol.

I'll have to research my ancient history as well before I can come up with rebuttals.

Though as a side joke it's good to know that it's mostly the Caucasian countries that are going to go under, us Minorities are pretty much good to go

Not really. Look at where the most savage fighting is today -- Central African Republic, Sudan, D. R. Congo... not to mention the AIDS epidemic and flat-out hunger and poverty. Would that change, if Europe and the US were destroyed in a great war? I doubt it.

What is to be destroyed, is the world system: The political system, the economic system, the system of distribution of goods and services, the whole ball of wax. Every country in the world is dependent on these things working. Just doing some surface thinking about these things, the world is in for a cataclysmic change. No problem with smog or greenhouse gasses -- no, the things producing those things may be put out of commission: You know, the fertilizer companies, the food delivery trucks, things like that. Those are just a few passing thoughts on the matter.

If the book of Daniel indeed prophesies about the end times, which it seems to do, it has to jibe with other "very last days" prophecies, such as the book of Zechariah. Zech 14 says:

Zech 14
[1] Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
[2] For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
[3] Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.
[4] And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.
[5] And ye shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yea, ye shall flee, like as ye fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah: and the LORD my God shall come, and all the saints with thee.
[6] And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
[7] But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.
[8] And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.
[9] And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.

That corresponds with the kingdom prophesied in Daniel 2:

Daniel 2
[42] And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
[43] And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
[44] And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
[45] Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

Daniel said the Messianic Kingdom would come "in the days of those kings", but Zechariah said that "all nations" would gather against Jerusalem to battle. Revelation also says a bit on these things; but if you want to discuss those matters, we must do it on the other thread. There is sufficient material in the OT, to see what's in store for us.

There's a saying, "If looks could kill, ..." The applicable saying today concerning Israel is, "If UN General Assembly votes were bombs, Israel would have been destroyed many times over by now." Anyone following the world-wide attack on Israel in the media, in political and diplomatic circles and in the universities of the world, should realize that one of these days it will turn into another Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq or Kossovo -- with the United States calling for action, the UN rubber-stamping it, and the British, French and others supplying troops.

About the only thing PREVENTING this from happening up until now, has been the US veto in the Security Council. All it takes, is for a US President who is not sympathetic with Israel, to switch sides. THAT, frankly, could happen at any moment. I wouldn't be at all surprized, if the ostensible motive for that attack would be to bring about "world peace" by ending Israeli "intransigence" on giving up its land and weapons, etc. When that happens (I don't say "if", but "when"), Zechariah 14 will be afoot; and we shall see if the scriptures come true.

Zechariah 14
[12] And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.
[13] And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great tumult from the LORD shall be among them; and they shall lay hold every one on the hand of his neighbour, and his hand shall rise up against the hand of his neighbour.

I'm sure Zechariah never witnessed an atomic explosion; but he described it to a tee -- even down to the tremendous flash and blast:

Zechariah 14
[6] And it shall come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear, nor dark:
[7] But it shall be one day which shall be known to the LORD, not day, nor night: but it shall come to pass, that at evening time it shall be light.

​

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Much of the issues in Africa and several other countries and regions today are the direct results of the colonization and imperialism of European powers. Even a lot of the issues in the middle east boil down to a European intervention following WWI.

Pretty much blame it on Europe.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Much of the issues in Africa and several other countries and regions today are the direct results of the colonization and imperialism of European powers. Even a lot of the issues in the middle east boil down to a European intervention following WWI.

Pretty much blame it on Europe.

I guess you'll have to study pre-colonial history as well. Read about the Kabaka of Buganda, who had the practice of arbitrarily killing a subject every day when the Europeans first met him, just to show his power; or about the practice of suttee in pre-Colonial India. Also, you might find that the Sultanate of Oman went out of business, when the British abolished the slave trade. When the system was in place, it was the Africans who hunted for slaves from among their own kinsmen and sold them for profit (as they still do today in East Africa, for Arab clients). The British Raj simply replaced the Mughal Raj, which replaced the Turkish Raj. At least the British left India a railway system. The Conquistadors were hard taskmasters; but they didn't demand human sacrifices of their subjects, as their Aztec and Inca predecessors did. I don't believe the Europeans "hurt" these people quite as much as you think. They simply tapped into wicked systems that were already in place and, in most cases, improved upon them. They DID bring the Bible to the world, if you didn't notice -- along with hospitals and orphanages. Those butchers in Sudan and CAR are not Europeans; it was their victims who asked for European help.

The world does not consist of black saints and white devils. I've lived around both blacks and whites; and the whites never hated me for my color. If you've never experienced the "hate stare", I lived with it daily while I worked in the houses of Afro-Americans to unclog their toilets for them. My grandchildren are Chinese. Do I need to tell you what their father suffered under the Red Guards? or what HIS parents suffered under the Japanese? I love my grandchildren; and I love their color. As for the Middle East, the British and French didn't teach the Shiites and Sunnis to kill one another, nor the Turks to kill the Armenians and Kurds; and if you want to blame the Jews, I have plenty of cousins who died in Auschwitz-Birkenau and Stanislau to tell you something about that matter. If you like, perhaps you can pray that they come to you in your sleep, to tell you about it. They've come to me in mine. The Arab Mufti of Jerusalem was a personal friend of Hitler, and helped him round up Jews to kill them. Save the liberal BS for someone else.

God is not judging the world powers because he hates white people; He is judging them, because people worship their governments, the work of human hands, instead of Him; and they've given themselves a bad deal in the bargain.

IMG SRC: Clueless Lefties Completely Ignorant About Hitler’s Ties to the Muslims
​

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I guess you'll have to study pre-colonial history as well. Read about the Kabaka of Buganda, who had the practice of arbitrarily killing a subject every day when the Europeans first met him, just to show his power; or about the practice of suttee in pre-Colonial India. Also, you might find that the Sultanate of Oman went out of business, when the British abolished the slave trade. When the system was in place, it was the Africans who hunted for slaves from among their own kinsmen and sold them for profit (as they still do today in East Africa, for Arab clients). The British Raj simply replaced the Mughal Raj, which replaced the Turkish Raj. At least the British left India a railway system. The Conquistadors were hard taskmasters; but they didn't demand human sacrifices of their subjects, as their Aztec and Inca predecessors did. I don't believe the Europeans "hurt" these people quite as much as you think. They simply tapped into wicked systems that were already in place and, in most cases, improved upon them. They DID bring the Bible to the world, if you didn't notice -- along with hospitals and orphanages. Those butchers in Sudan and CAR are not Europeans; it was their victims who asked for European help.

The world does not consist of black saints and white devils. I've lived around both blacks and whites; and the whites never hated me for my color. If you've never experienced the "hate stare", I lived with it daily while I worked in the houses of Afro-Americans to unclog their toilets for them. My grandchildren are Chinese. Do I need to tell you what their father suffered under the Red Guards? or what HIS parents suffered under the Japanese? I love my grandchildren; and I love their color. As for the Middle East, the British and French didn't teach the Shiites and Sunnis to kill one another, nor the Turks to kill the Armenians and Kurds; and if you want to blame the Jews, I have plenty of cousins who died in Auschwitz-Birkenau and Stanislau to tell you something about that matter. If you like, perhaps you can pray that they come to you in your sleep, to tell you about it. They've come to me in mine. The Arab Mufti of Jerusalem was a personal friend of Hitler, and helped him round up Jews to kill them. Save the liberal BS for someone else.

God is not judging the world powers because he hates white people; He is judging them, because people worship their governments, the work of human hands, instead of Him; and they've given themselves a bad deal in the bargain.

IMG SRC: Clueless Lefties Completely Ignorant About Hitler’s Ties to the Muslims
​

Lol you got so sensitive. Did I say that those nations did not have leaders that acted cruelly? But according to the prophecy if you go by what happened to the Roman empire the division into the 10 nations, the european countries are going to get the hammer. Pointing out the atrocities wrought by the "inheritors" of the roman empire have very little to do with being liberal...it also amazes me how people are quick to tie in their political beliefs with their religious ones.

As well, there's more to the destruction of people than just their lives as carried by the European nations, lost of identity, culture, and the continuous idea that without the Europeans that the lives of these people would have just continued to sink into depravity or gotten worst...of course we will never truly know because history is written by the victors.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Lol you got so sensitive.

Me? Sensitive? Well, maybe a little
​

Did I say that those nations did not have leaders that acted cruelly? But according to the prophecy if you go by what happened to the Roman empire the division into the 10 nations, the european countries are going to get the hammer. Pointing out the atrocities wrought by the "inheritors" of the roman empire have very little to do with being liberal

I hail from the days when "liberal" meant "big spender" -- of money and, it seems, also opinions. One of those opinions seems to be that every white man except Santa Clause is an ogre; and that the REAL Santa is Barack Obama.

​

...it also amazes me how people are quick to tie in their political beliefs with their religious ones.

I think it's absolutely incredible

As well, there's more to the destruction of people than just their lives as carried by the European nations, lost of identity, culture, and the continuous idea that without the Europeans that the lives of these people would have just continued to sink into depravity or gotten worst...of course we will never truly know because history is written by the victors.

You're right. We need to get back into the scriptures.

The Bible has a consistent theme. Wicked people don't "get it", because they think God is an ogre (ergo, a white man, perhaps?), therefore they don't want to hear what He has to say, because they are certain He is speaking against them:

Luke 20
...[14] But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
[15] So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
[16] He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
[17] And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
[18] Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
[19] And the chief priests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.
[20] And they watched him, and sent forth spies, which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold of his words, that so they might deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.

Jesus spoke of something that few people, even today, want to hear: that all of our deeds, as well as all our hidden thoughts, will be judged; that our judge is all knowing and severe, and that without mercy we literally don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of going free.

ALL STAND. THE SUPREME APPELLATE COURT OF THE UNIVERSE IS NOW IN SESSION, THE HONORABLE JOHN URQHART TALKINGHORN PRESIDING.

​

He tried to warn us, He really did. He gave us the laws of physics, including the law of gravity, which is IRREVOCABLE.

I believe that Daniel 2 points ultimately to the final judgment, because EVERYTHING in the Bible points ultimately to the final judgment; because what goes up, must come down.

Luke 14
[11] For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

I need to go, to take out the garbage -- some time before Judgment Day, else I may be in trouble. While I'm at it, I'd better check the mail (bills, and other forms of gravity).

Shalom shalom

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Hello again, Franklin. I see that you're still offline. I woke up this morning, considering something you said:

...according to the prophecy if you go by what happened to the Roman empire the division into the 10 nations, the european countries are going to get the hammer...

Concerning the nature of that "hammer", some operative verses are:

Zech. 14
[1] Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.
[2] For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.
[3] Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

and

[12] And this shall be the plague wherewith the LORD will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.
[13] And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great tumult from the LORD shall be among them; and they shall lay hold every one on the hand of his neighbour, and his hand shall rise up against the hand of his neighbour.

The "plague" will apparently be a nuclear exchange of some sort, or else a cosmic catastrophe such as an unusual solar flare, a meteor, a comet, or what have you. Human agency is implied in "his hand shall rise up against the hand of his neighbor". In the two scenarios above,

1. Human agency: Because of the electronic dependance of the world today, the first strike by any country will probably be EMP devices, which even the smallest nuclear states are capable of discharging. These would drive the industrialized world back into the pre-mechanical age for a significant period of time, long enough for there to be mass starvation, disease and a complete breakdown of law and order. In morally degenerate countries (i.e. essentially the whole world), this would be the cause of fighting "every hand against his neighbor". The nuclear exchange itself would, of course, be such a fratricidal struggle on a strategic level; but the reasons would be different (which I shall detail below).
2. In the case of a natural, cosmic calamity, the initial "attack" will also primarily be EMP in nature, accompanied by world-wide "Krakatoa"-type conditions, probably on an enhanced scale. The ensuing chaos, starvation, etc. would be as in #1

Concerning Israel in those days,

[14] And Judah also shall fight at Jerusalem; and the wealth of all the heathen round about shall be gathered together, gold, and silver, and apparel, in great abundance.

Whatever the nature of this "plague", Israel and her immediate neighbors will apparently be free enough of radiation, that they can gather goods together.

[15] And so shall be the plague of the horse, of the mule, of the camel, and of the ***, and of all the beasts that shall be in these tents, as this plague.

The "plague" described is not that of EMP effects, but of low-EMP, localized thermonuclear FLASH. Neither are the effects described those of residual radiation. Animals in the field would certainly also be affected by these; but the expression "in these tents" (animals indoors would be protected from the initial flash) seems to indicate that what is being described are the VEHICLES of the invading armies. Many of them WOULD be affected by EMP effects, because of their electronics. The "plague", therefore, probably refers to the entire exchange: both the initial EMP attacks, and the higher-blast, low-altitude local thermonuclear blasts to follow.

[16] And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.

In the case of a human-initiated nuclear exchange, the major nuclear powers, especially Russia and the US, would want to pre-emptively destroy their natural enemies' capabilities. The Russians would be concerned about follow-up attacks by the Europeans, Chinese and countries to their south (Turks, Iranians, Central Asians and Pakistanis -- all Muslim countries). China, Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, France, the UK and other nuclear-capable countries would certainly be on their target list.

As for the US in Russian eyes, the main threat would be the deployed military forces, especially the ballistic-missile-submarines (which China , France, UK and India also have, by the way, as well as the Russians). They will use their own forces, especially nuclear-powered ships, to deal with them.

The Americans would not feel so immediately threatened by the Brits, Pakies, etc.; but they would certainly do their best to destroy the Russian nuclear arsenal and China's productive capacity.

The final decisions to carry out the above attacks would have to be determined within minutes, perhaps seconds, and there must be no second-guessing.

Who would "feel the hammer" in such scenarios? Physically, the whole world would be in severe disaster mode; but psychologically, the countries most affected would be states that at present are NOT failed or staggering. Here's a map:

​

The brown countries would be least-affected, followed by the orange. The green countries would be most affected. You are therefore correct about your "hammer" statement: The world's "core countries", namely the US and her closest allies other than Israel, would be hit the hardest -- and these are the very countries that most likely will lead the assault on Israel.

Just as a sideline, you might see here how it is that I have had trouble classifying Russia as one of the "ten". I still haven't made up my mind about this.

BTW I expect very little response from the readers concerning these awful omens. Most readers have already considered these things and pushed them completely out of their minds. Most people, in short, are living in unreality. The events detailed above should wake them up, WHEN THEY HAPPEN. By then, it will be pretty late to prepare psychologically. It is then, that Messiah's Kingdom will begin its reign. I don't know what that will be like.