[crystalk]

I understood that principle before (I should guess) you were born!

I notice you say nothing to apologize for three stated or implied outright falsehoods:

A. That the A of D might have been Antiochus, when you know Jesus says that ALL/both applications are future.

B. That the Hebrew word "shamam" can (you say) mean a dirt or stain, etc. rather than a wasteland, a desolation, wilderness, desert...Either you have no Hebrew at all, or you were intentionally attempting to mislead.

C. You also imply (and nearly SAY) that the A of D is mentioned in Revelation, when you know that it is not. You also say that it there represents a world political leader such as a dictator, which it might sometimes be, perhaps, but cannot do so in Revelation for there it never appears.

Oh, no, I have not lost it. I am onto every trick.

[Emmanual_Goldstein16]

I am interested in what your source materials might be. I understand the historicist underpinnings of your post and would like to learn more on the subject. I wish more people would think outside the box of their cherished traditions.