Daniel 8:9-14 and Related Scripture Interpreted.
Copyright Bruce Craig, Director of The Church Registry

"Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Dan. 8:14, KJV.
"After 2300 offerings; then shall the Holy One be Vindicated." Dan. 8:14, Bruce Craig Trans.

HomeStudy MaximsH6663 tsadaq Defined

Interpretation of Scripure Must First Seek Therein the Messiah

As shown below, Scripture stories are parables which reveal facets of the "controversy between Christ and Satan." The enemy of God uses every method he can divise to divert the attention of a person from Heavenly things to earthly things. Scripture was given to mankind to reveal that the Godhead created us, made provision to redeem us from our sin, and to restore those who would accept to the perfect state in which Adam and Eve were originally created. The prophecy given to Daniel as recorded in Chapter 8 is, to me, the most prominent example of interpreters and commentators attempting to find fulfillment in earthly kingdoms, people, and events. The fulfillment is not found in any of them, rather the fulfillment is found in Christ's ministry and sacrifice on the cross. Scripture records He specifically spoke of "the prophet Daniel." When He spoke to the disciples on the road to Emaeus, He told them that Moses and all the prophets spoke of Him. Failure to see the Messiah in prophecy leads to false doctrine.

Study Must Combine Spirit and Scripture

First, some background. I commenced the study represent in this website March of 2009. I did so because of three presentations from the pulpit of the congregation where my wife and I attended. These presentations were purported to be "new" information about the Sanctuary Doctrine and 1844. In fact, they were poorly presented rehashes of what I had been taught commencing at my father's knee and had believed for many years. I learned from a very patient friend that these doctrines were terribly wrong, and realized how they had adversely affected my Christian experience specifically and life generally. I formally left the SdA denomination in 1984 knowing these doctrines were wrong. Though I knew the doctrines were wrong, I found no "right" understanding of the prophecy set out in Daniel 8:9-14, and especially of vs 13,14.

After the second presentation, I resolved then to "find for myself" the truth about this prophecy. I was well aware that Scripture may only be properly interpreted/understood by first pleading for the leading of the Holy Spirit. In that manner, and only in that manner, did I commence to search the Scriptures. In fact, though subsequent study, and especially input from my wife, has continued to "fill out" my conclusions, every core of the interpretations which I present here were arrived at strickly and only from my Scripture studies over a period of three months.

At that point I realized my conclusions were such that I had never seen or heard prior. My wonder at that fact lead me to think, "Surely, someone has presented this somewhere." I then commenced to access every reasonable source including Bible commentaries, Bible encyclopedias, SdA and non-SdA authored books, and web sites. What I found was a few hints, like wagons circling the fire, from about four scholars. Each hinted at a different facet of what I had concluded, but none had reached the same interpretation. I shared my studies and conclusions with my wife but, at the time, she continued to hold to the SdA tradition.

Early in the third presentation, the statement was made that Raymond Cattrell was a "so-called scholar" of Scripture. By reason of having the SdA commentary in my library (2nd Edition), I was well aware that Raymond Cottrell was far more a scholar of Scripure than the pretender occupying the pulpit could claim to be. I could either speak out, or hold my peace and quietly exit; I felt exiting would be the better choice. After the meeting adjourned, the presenter confronted me asking why I exited. During the ensuing comments, He stated, "[Christ] had to enter the Most Holy Place to sprinkle His blood."

Shortly after we left and were traveling home, my wife suddenly said, "Wait! If every part of the Sanctuary represents some aspect of Christ and His sacrifice,* why would He have to sprinkle His blood on Himself?!" From that point, my wife grasped to my interpretation and has since added significanly to what is now our interpretation and belief. It is appropriate that I mention that my wife, who being from India, has a better cultural understanding of Bible stories and idioms than do westerners. Her insights have been a great help to me as I continue to seek to better understand Scripture.

My point is, I firmly believe in, and practice, that I never study without first requesting the Holy Spirit to be present to open my mind to Scripture truths, and I never consult other sources unless and until I've reached a conclusion. For me, this procedure is a required maxim of Scripture study.

*As the presenter had correctly cited during his first presentation.

Desmond Ford comments:

"Two temptations await every Christian. One is to seek the guidance of the Spirit wthout the Scriptures. This leads to fanaticism. The other no less real peril is to use the Scriptures without constant dependence upon the Spirit. This leads to a cold rational faith that cannot resurrect the soul dead in treaspasses and sins. The phenomenon presented by scores of cults, each claiming that its intpretations come from the Bible and the Bible only, illustrates the peril against which we warn. Indeed, their interpretations have come from the Bible only in the sense that the Spirit has not been a welcome teacher in their midst, and consequently the use of Scripture has become abused. Pure Protestantism affirms as its principel of authority the Holy Spirit speaking through the Scriptures. Thus there is an external principle (the Bible) and and internal principle (the witness of the Spirit) which alone can counteract the noetic effects of sin and illuminate the mind." Daniel p 56.

C.S. Lewis' comment, and Des Ford's additional comment:

"'A man who has spent his youth and manhood in minute study of New Testament texts and of other people's studies of them, whose literary experiences of those texts lacks any standard of comparision such as can only grow from a wide and deep and genial experience of literature in general, is, I should think, very likely to miss the obvious things about them ...' C.S. Lewis, Christian Reflections pp. 154. Ford then says, "Put 'Old' instead of 'New' before the word 'Testament,' and what Lewis says is appropriate for the present skepticism about many Old Testament scholars who have made guesses about Daniel 9:24-27." In the Heart of Daniel, p. 69.

The last sentence applies equally to "guesses" about Daniel 8:8-14 and 7:10, but not limited to.

Study to Show Thyself Approved, 2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV):

It is my responsibility to study Scripture for myself. Scripture is always my first source, the first tool I use, for study. There are other tools I use, but what any other tool asserts must always be measured by Scripture and not Scripture by the tool.

For those who, like me, are not fluent in Hebrew and Aramaic, dictionaries are a required tool. A pastor friend recommended to me, "Let Scripture define itself." For that reason, I first compile every occurance of a particular Hebrew or Aramaic word in Scripture and compare the texts to find the contexts, senses and scopes of the word. Only then do I reference relevant Hebrew or Aramaic dictionaries to aid me in my understanding of the various grammatical uses. My order of preference for Hebrew dictionaries is Brown-Driver-Briggs, Strongs, and On-line searches.

I have presented many seminars on Scripture and secular laws. I always ended my presentations with, "Don't take my word for it. Study it for yourself." Paul's words to Timothy preceded my advice by nearly two milleniums.

The Authorized Church of England Translation from the Greek:

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (KJV)

English Translations from the Aramaic:

"And take care of yourself, that you present yourself perfectly before God, a laborer without shame, who preaches* the word of truth straightforwardly." (Bauscher)

"And you should be diligent to present yourself maturely before God, a worker without shame, who is rightly proclaiming the word of truth." (Magiera)

"And study to present yourself before Elohim perfeclty, a laborer who is not ashamed, one who correctly announces the Word of Truth." (Roth)

* Bauscher cites that the Aramaic word is "preach straight" in contrast to the Greek (translation from the Aramaic) which is "cut a straight path."

Applicable reference texts (all Darby)

"... quench not the Spirit; / do not lightly esteem prophecies; / but prove all things, hold fast the right;" 1 Thessalonians 5:19-21.

"And they shall not teach each his fellow-citizen, and each his brother, saying, Know the Lord; because all shall know me in themselves, from the little one among them unto the great among them." Hebrews 8:11.

One of the duties of a Christian is to test the prophets. It is commanded in the Bible, and failure to do so is disobedience to God's Word:

"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out into the world." (1 John 4:1).

The reason given that we are to test the prophets is because there are "many" false ones out there. Jesus recognized this problem would face His people in the future. "Beware of false prophets", he warned, "And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many." (Matt. 7:15, 24:11) He went on to warn that even good Christians, intelligent people—"the very elect"—could be deceived:

"For there shall arise...false prophets...insomuch that if were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." (Matt. 24:24)

See also False Witnesses section below.

The True Witness

Yeshua Messiah, being sinless, is the reliable True Witness for doctrine. He said several times that His duty was to finish His Father's work. He said, at the cross, "It is finished." Any doctrine that does not conform with His words are false doctrines.

Two or Three Witnesses

Scripture repeatedly states "upon the word of two or three witnesses ..." See Matthew 18:16, Numbers 35:30, Deuteronomy 19:15, 2 Corinthians 13, 1 Timothy 5:19, Hebrews 10:28. This Scriptural maxim of witnesses includes matters of both disputes (judgments) and doctrine. Secular law allows one witness known as a Notary Public. One witness is insufficient to settle a matter in Scripture. See Deuteronomy 17:6, 1 Timothy 5:19. The cited Scriptures act as their own witness to the doctrine of witnesses.

Notice and Grace

Notice and Grace falls within the same principle as Two or Three Witnesses.

It is a maxim of law from time out of mind that, when one has a complaint with another, the one gives three opportunities for the other to respond to the complaint. The notice times were First Notice-three months, Second Notice-three weeks, and Third Notice-three days (72-hours). An example is the 72-hour notice a landlord posts to a renter to vacate a premises. You, the reader may ask, "How is this a third notice?" The rental application is the first notice because the renter is told the terms of payment in the application. The rental contract is the second notice because the renter agrees, as the signer, to the terms of payment. Failure to pay results in the third notice, but the renter has a grace period to redeem himself and avoid eviction. The grace period is 72-hours. Why three days?

In the ages before planes, trains, automobiles, electronic transfers, etc., conveyance of information was slow. Thus, the first notice provided three months grace period to allow for travel of the complaint by one and response of the other. The second notice presumed the other had made attempt to respond, but perhaps was still a few days journey away, so gave an additional three weeks grace period. The third and final notice was for three days. The term "Notice and Grace" refers to this procedure. These traditional time periods are adhered to, even in our age, for any potential litigation. However, for informal use, Notice and Grace may be accomplished within a few moments. Consider the following exchange between Christ and Peter:

"And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me. ... And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And Peter went out, and wept bitterly." Luke 22:34,61,62. See also Matthew 26:34,75 and Mark 14:30, 72.

Here, Peter realizes he has been given Notice and Grace, but failed to redeem himself because he denied Christ three times. However, Peter is given another opportunity to redeem himself:

"This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead. So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep." John 21:14-16.

This exchange between Jesus and Peter complies with "two or three witnesses" as well as "notice and grace" because Jesus and Peter were the two witnesses and each "witnessed" three times during the exchange.

False Witnesses

The following is equally applicable today, for those who fail to measure commentators by scripture, thus bearing false witness, place themselves in a position of peril such as found out those who bore false witness against Daniel.

"The experience of the false accusers of Daniel is another illustration of Godís faithfulness to the basic Abrahamic Covenant where God promised to bless them who blessed Abrahamís seed and to curse him who curseth them (Gen 12:3)." Walvoord, p. 143.

Consider the fates of both Ahab and Jezebel because of their scheming to murder Naboth:

"Now Naboth the Jezreelite had a vine-garden in Jezreel, near the house of Ahab, king of Samaria. And Ahab said to Naboth, Give me your vine-garden so that I may have it for a garden of sweet plants, for it is near my house; and let me give you a better vine-garden in exchange, or, if it seems good to you, let me give you its value in money. But Naboth said to Ahab, By the Lord, far be it from me to give you the heritage of my fathers. So Ahab came into his house bitter and angry because Naboth the Jezreelite had said to him, I will not give you the heritage of my fathers. And stretching himself on the bed with his face turned away, he would take no food. But Jezebel, his wife, came to him and said, Why is your spirit so bitter that you have no desire for food? And he said to her, Because I was talking to Naboth the Jezreelite, and I said to him, Let me have your vine-garden for a price, or, if it is pleasing to you, I will give you another vine-garden for it: and he said, I will not give you my vine-garden. Then Jezebel, his wife, said, Are you now the ruler of Israel? Get up, take food, and let your heart be glad; I will give you the vine-garden of Naboth the Jezreelite. So she sent a letter in Ahab's name, stamped with his stamp, to the responsible men and the chiefs who were in authority with Naboth. And in the letter she said, Let a time of public sorrow be fixed, and put Naboth at the head of the people; And get two good-for-nothing persons to come before him and give witness that he has been cursing God and the king. Then take him out and have him stoned to death. So the responsible men and the chiefs who were in authority in his town, did as Jezebel had said in the letter she sent them. They gave orders for a day of public sorrow, and put Naboth at the head of the people. And the two good-for-nothing persons came in and took their seats before him and gave witness against Naboth, in front of the people, saying, Naboth has been cursing God and the king. Then they took him outside the town and had him stoned to death." I Kings 21:1-13. (KJV)

Ananias and Sapphira both bore false witness against themselves with fatal consequenses:

"But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, got money for his property, And kept back part of the price, his wife having knowledge of it, and took the rest and put it at the feet of the Apostles. But Peter said, Ananias, why has the Evil One put it into your heart to be false to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land? While you had it, was it not your property? and after you had given it in exchange, was it not still in your power? how has this purpose come into your mind? you have been false, not to men, but to God. And at these words, Ananias went down on the earth, and his life went from him: and great fear came on all who were present. And the young men went and made ready his body, and took it out, and put it in the earth. And about three hours after, his wife, having no knowledge of what had taken place, came in. And Peter said to her, Give me an answer: was this amount of money the price of the land? And she said, Yes, it was. But Peter said to her, Why have you made an agreement together to be false to the Spirit of the Lord? See, the feet of the young men who have put the body of your husband in the earth, are at the door, and they will take you out. And straight away she went down at his feet, and her life went from her: and the young men came in and saw her dead, and they took her out and put her in the earth with her husband." Acts 5:1-10 (KJV)

Is bearing false witness about Scripture and the doctrines recorded therein any less of a sin against the Godhead?

Prima Facie Evidence

GenerallyPrima facie means "as it appears at first look." Any form of evidence that is not from the original source is hearsay or gossip, thus is prima facie evidence. Secular statutes are prima facie as they are only evidence of the positive law. Statutes classified into a body of subjects are not positive law unless so enacted by an act of the legislature. No law or statute may be more broad than allowed by the Constitution of the relevant government. Regulations and Rules are not positive law, but are required to enable administration of the statutes. No regulation may be more broad than allowed by the statute. Regulations are often far more narrow in scope than anticipated by a statute; in many instances no regulations have been promulgated to enable administration of a statute. No rule may be more broad than allowed by a regulation; if there are no regulations promulgated, there can be no related administrative rules. Court decisions are often referenced as "the law" when, in fact, a decision may only affect the constitutionality of, or compliance with, statues, regulations, or rules. The "law" is found in the heirarchy of laws, in order of descendng authority:
  Postitive Law:
    Legislative Intent
    Legislative Acts
    Statutes at Large
    Statutes Classified and Enacted as a Body
  Prima Facie:
    Statutes Classified, not Enacted as a Body
  Statutes Enabled:
    Regulations Promulgated Thereunder
    Administrative Rules
  Constitutionality; Compliance with Statutes, Regulations or Rules:
    Court decisions

Hearsay is prima facie and generally not acceptable as evidence. Prima facie is often unreliable for any of several reasons, inter alia:

Prima facie evidence may be accepted as reliable if no objection is given.

Scripturally — All Scripture translations—including the Greek and Latin—from Hebrew and Aramaic are prima facie evidence of the original Hebrew and Aramaic. All translations are not "original" witnesses for doctrine; thus all Scripture translations are hearsay. Only the Hebrew and Aramaic are "original" witnesses; thus, only the Hebrew and Aramaic are reliable sources for doctrine.

KJV Claims — There are those who claim the KJV is the only reliable "preserved" Scripture. That claim is, at best, disingenuous as it begs the question, "Which one in the progresson of KJV versions is the 'preserved' version"? The KJV—in any of its versions—is a translation, therefore is prima facie and hearsay. The KJV is not a reliable witness for doctrine generally as it was commissioned to preserve and propagate the doctrines of the Church of England. Therefore the KJV is an Episcopalian version so is a reliable witness only for Episcopalian doctrine. If follows that those non-Episcopalians who rely on the KJV are covert Episcopalians.

You, the reader, may ask, "Why are many of your quotes from the KJV?" My answer is, "Those who really want to find the truth will use the hearsay as a place to start." When I realized the standing of the KJV, I commenced to obtain Hebrew and Aramaic interlinears and Scripture versions and dictionaries. So far as I can find, only the KJV+ and Green's Interlinear have Strong's numbers to cross reference English with Hebrew and Greek. Magieara's Interlinear is the only one I know of that uses a numbering system to cross reference English with Aramaic (Peshitta). I commence with computer word searches for Strong's numbers in the KJV+ to find the overview of a word, then proceed to Green's (OT for Hebrew) or Magiera (NT for Aramaic) to get the best possible sense of the original languages. That is, the KJV is a tool for me, but is not a source of doctrine.

Traditions of Men

Yeshua condemned the Judeans for their reliance upon tradition:

"Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Matthew 15:1-9.

"Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands? He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition. For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death: But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye." Mark 7:5-13.

Another New Testament witness condemns reliance upon tradition:

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." Colossians 2:8.

Tradition is not admissable as evidence for Scriptural doctrine. Any doctrine not in accord with Scripture is false doctrine.

Prophecy as Parables

I recently stated to an Adventist pastor that "Scripture is a parable ... " Without letting me finish my statement, the pastor angrily responded, "No it is not! It is literal!" My complete statement would have been—and still is—"Scripture is a parable where the stories recorded about the people contain aspects or facets of the plan of redemption." Yes, the stories are literal, but most, if not all, include parallels of Heavenly import. The story of Cain and Abel is a parable of how the disobedience of Adam lead to the death of the obedient Messiah. There are several stories of how the first son lost his birthright to the second son; these include Ismael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob and others. They are parables of how Adam lost his birthright (which Satan aspired to claim) and which birthright the Messiah redeemed. I classify these "first son-second son" stories as "Parables of the First Adam and the Second Adam."

Adam was created "in our image" by the Creator God. Adam, Hebrew Aw-dahm, means "first man"; grammatically "first Adam" is a redundancy, the "first first man." I.e., "Aw-dahm" was a description which became used as a proper noun as his name, Adam. He was the First Adam. When the Messiah was born, He took on the "image," the "form" of mankind and became the "last first man" or the Second Adam. Jesus taught us to pray, "Our father which art in heaven ..." Thus we are all sons and daughters of God, so it is proper to reference Adam and Christ as the sons of God. Adam was the "first" son of God, Christ was the "second" son of God who redeemed the birthright which the first son had lost. Note this Scripture:

"And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven." I Corinthians 15:45-47.

Jesus spoke in parables using simple stories to open views of Heaven to the listeners. This is also true of prophecies, especially where the prophets use things of earth to point to the proponent of evil, Satan, and his war against the Messiah to come. Desmond Ford correctly comments on the status of prophecies as parables:

"All apotelesmatic prophecies are inevitably similar to parabolic prophecies, such as Eze 40-48 and Rev 9, where general emphases, rather than every jot and tittle, are to be taken as having didactic purpose. Apocalyptic is a type of prose painting, and as in parable, some things are present for background rather than for a specifice teaching purpose, as is so in this type of prophecy." Daniel p187.

Intelligible Only Upon Fulfillment

Once again, Desmond Ford indentifies a too-often ignored maxim of study:

"In Jn 13:19 and 14:29 Christ assures His disciples that complete understanding and assurance concerning certain of His apparently mystical statements will dawn only when such sayings arre fulfilled. This should be a caveat for all intepreters of prophecies yet unfulfilled. Prophecy presents a skeleton of the future, not a flesh-clothed, animated body. The plan of God becomes fully transparent only with the unrolling of the scroll.: Danel p50.

Applicable reference texts:

"I tell you it now before it happens, that when it happens, ye may believe that I am he." John 13:19 Darby.

"And now I have told you before it comes to pass, that when it shall have come to pass ye may believe." John 14:29 Darby.

Apotelesmatic Principle

With the apotelesmatic principle in mind, every part of the interpretation given to Daniel in ch. 8, vs. 15-27 also fit the classification of the little horn to be Satan, and the actions those of Satan's attack on Christ during His ministry, and the defeat of Satan at the cross where he "shall be broken without hand," v. 25. Further, note that Daniel is told the vision of the evening and the morning is true and that he is to "shut up" the vision.

"It should be remembered that the prophet [Daniel] is here [8:9] giving a running account of the prophetic symbolization, as the scenes were presented to him. He is not yet intepreting the vision. The interpretation of this feature of the vision occurs in v. 23. An important rule to follow when interpreting the symbols of visions is to assign an interpretation only to those features of pictorial representation that were intended to have interpretative value. As in parables, certain features are needed to complete the dramatic presentation, but are not necessarily significant of themselves. Which of these have intepretative value, Inspiration alone can determine. Seeing that in this instance Inspiration (v. 23) speaks only of the time when the power represented by this horn was to emerge, and says nothing as to its geographical point of origin, there is no reason for us to lay stress on the phrase, 'out of one of them.' ∂ "... the reasonable assumption here is that the 'horn' power ... also applies to Rome. This interpretation is confirmed by the fact that Rome precisely fulfilled the various aspects of the vision. ∂ "This little horn represents Rome in both its phases, pagan and papal. Daniel saw Rome first in its pagan, imperial phase, warring against the Jewish people and the early Christians, and then in its papal phase, continuing down to our own day and into the future, warring against the true church. On this double application see on vs. 13, 23." Re: Daniel 8:9, SdA Bible Commentary, v. 4, p. 841.

I dispute that the little horn has any fulfillment, in this prophecy, in either pagan or papal form. I also dispute the statement, "... there is no reason for us to lay stress on the phrase, 'out of one of them.'" I have fully set out, in other writings on this site, that the little horn is Satan and that "out of one of them" is, in fact, significant because it shows the prophecy to be a parable of Satan coming from his evil lair to promote false doctrine and to attack the Messiah. Notwithstanding the SdA errors, the Apotelesmatic Principle may apply to some prophecies, thus must not be discounted because of errors in the theology of some commentators.

HomeStudy MaximsH6663 tsadaq Defined

Site and contents Copyright The Church Registry and
Bruce Craig, Director of The Church Registry except as otherwise noted.
Scripture quotes are KJV unless otherwise noted.
Quotes from copyrighted material remain the property of the copyright holders.
All Rights Reserved.