Analysis Of Daniel 12 : 1 Essay

Ironically, during his inauguration speech, Trump stated, “ The crowd was unbelievable today...God was looking down on us.” One thing never seems to change is using God as a justification for one’s actions. Sorry, Mr. Trump, God was definitely not on your side. You will be recorded in the history books as one of America’s most infamous leaders.

In his landmark and popular book released in September 2016 he describes Donald Trump as: “God 's Chaos candidate." This term is based on a word he received from the Lord:

Trump acts as a religious figure where he dictates the morality of the collective. The collective has the power to impose moral expectations on the individual that explains their actions. Many people identify with the Republican party where their views are dominated by the collective in which they identify with and thus, support their collective leader. Durkheim defines religion as a system of beliefs and practices that unite a community through “collective effervescence” that forms “harmony and unison of movement[s]” (Durkheim 1915, 218). The force of collective on individuals could be uncontrollable and it dominates their bodies and perceptions that leads to “outlandish behavior” (Durkheim 1915, 218). Trump supporters lose themselves in a rally and experience a sense of euphoria by being in a collective and cheering on what they considered is sacred. Trump claims to provide his followers the sacred while protecting them from the “profane” such as the Mexicans or the Muslims. The followers believe in the faith of a “better America” and possess totems that represent their unity such as the red hat or the campaign

In one way, I do agree with him. How can an almighty, all good God scorn murder and yet annoint a man willing to butcher women and children alike? In this period, they weren't fighting enemy foreigners; they were willing to do these monstrosities to those who were their own people. Usurpering the throne can be found as righteous? Unlikely. There were a lot of people who seemed to have 'revelations' in the old testament, both within judaistic principle and outside of it. In modern times, we would find these acts completely barbaric and inexcusable, so what excuses it in that time period? I do not agree that this is the fault of any religious institution or even of false revelation. There is a simple fact about many humans-- we desire power. Even in today's world, people are willing to kill to both secure and obtain power. It does not require a catalyst, though they may have them, the base root of man is to further themselves. It is entirely unsuprising that kings were willing to do whatever it takes to sustain themselves, and they most certainly would want to claim God was on their side in doing

Son of Saul is a historical fiction film that gives the jewish and nazi experiences within a extermination camp. Son of Saul authentically portrays the Holocaust through the perspectives of the Sonderkommandos and the Nazi SS by attempting to film every scene in first person with the camera focus on one Sonderkommando. The film is authentic, because its cinematography exposes taboos of Holocaust filmmaking as well as the juxtaposed mentalities of survivors and victims within an extermination camp in first person. The definition of authentic applied in this instance is something original with genuinely reliable value. This film’s cinematography is instrumental in the expression of these juxtaposed mentalities and Holocaust film-making taboos.

1. In all likelihood, who were the Nicolaitans who are referred to in Revelation 2:15?

But with careful attention to details we can make rather good sense of it all. Looking ahead, there is more revelation about this little horn of verse 9. Chapter 11 speaks of the Antichrist as well as another man. This other man is a lesser type of the “antichrist,” but the tribulation Man of Sin will duplicate much of what he does with a far greater intensity. So this “type” of the Antichrist and his works and origin are important to our study.

6?And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvelous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.37?Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.38?But in his estate shall he honor the God of forces: and a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honors with gold, and silver, and with precious stones, and pleasant things.(KJV)

The passage of Scripture being discussed in the following paper is Daniel 7:1-14. This chapter consists of three literary sections, first, chaos by the sea (7:1-8) followed by the heavenly courtroom (7:9-14), concluding with the visions divine victory and interpretation (7:15-28) which will not be addressed in this paper. The Christian canon locates the book of Daniel within its prophetic writings, however, the Jewish canon includes it within, “the Writings.” The book of Daniel doesn’t necessarily fit in either category, as it is widely considered within the literary category of apocalyptic literature which the subsequent sections of this paper will explore further. Daniel can be divided into three sections, based on language: a Hebrew introduction (Ch. 1); an Aramaic section (Ch. 2-7); and a Hebrew section (Ch. 8-12). Within these three language divisions exist two literary sections, first, the Tales (Ch. 1-6) followed by the Visions (Ch. 7-12). These two sections, though existing within the language divisions appear to have no corresponding connection.

What is the appropriate understanding of verse 12? Is the metaphor saying a destruction but a small part of it will be rescued to indicate there is still hope for just the remaining? The commentary helps me to understand it clearly. It says that it signifies a new oracle whose image offer a macabre sense of hope (p.294). It means rescue may be part of God's intension but this rescue provides little confidence to those who pause to hear what is genuinely saying. It means the remnant of Samaria will only remain. Here Amos does not say who is like the lion and the commentary has no further comment. I believe the lion is probably refers to God as in verse 3:8. The image used here is very powerful to speak of the total destruction of Samaria by enemy.

Within the wake of his destructive net are not only politicians, but the people of faith, the evangelicals, called to be a holy people. Again for clarity, this phrase, like the one preceding it, will have a particular fulfilment when Trump betrays the nation of Israel during the coming tribulation. But this destruction is already happening to a gullible — and way too often — an evangelical community lacking holiness. They, like many others, are fed up with what has been

Like mention in the video, they were not violent individuals they were regular individuals. Being in the situation that they were caused them to take further steps. They were doing this for the individuals that were doing this to stop them from from moving forward with the damages that they were doing. The view of these individuals were regular individuals were taking a step forward to be able to help the forest and their planet. Like they were not seeing any results this only led them to this social movement were they were getting themselves into. When seeing other individuals getting this work done or getting something done is when they were able to see the other group as a reference group where they would follow up to what they were doing. This is when they based their identity to themselves. This were the push factors that motivated other “normal” individuals to come together to become “violent.”

Many bible scholars take the position that the antichrist being a confederacy of ten nations. “The ten horns are ten kings who will come from this kingdom. After them another king will arise, different from the earlier ones; he will subdue three kings. He will speak against the Most High and oppress His holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. The holy people will be delivered into his hands for a time, times and half a time” (King James Version, Daniel. 7:24-25).

The old Middle East was the narrative of one domain rising, falling, and being supplanted by another. In 605 B.C., the Babylonians vanquished Israel, taking a significant number of its promising young fellows into bondage in Babylon. One of those men was Daniel.

The question arises then, what of Antichrist types? Judas, Antiochus Epiphanes, Nimrod and King Herod and are some of many examples. In the book of Esther, we have the reckless and violent Haman, a type of Antichrist in direct conflict and bitter envy against Mordecai, a type of Christ. In this chapter, the focus is on Nimrod. He is: A.) One of the clearer examples of Antichrist typology and B.) Clearly a type of Trump as well.