Nicole,

http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/may2012/nicole515-3.htm

In response to your assertion that Obama is gay, fulfilling Daniel 11:37, I don’t have personal knowledge of his sexual orientation, although he wants their political support.  However, I am certain the Daniel 11:37 passage does NOT indicate that the antichrist will be a homosexual.  To begin with, it does not fit into the context of the sentence describing the various gods not regarded by the evil ruler.  

More simply, it is a fact of English.  The prepositions “of” and “for” have two different meanings in this context.  In Daniel’s sentence, the translators use “OF” women, which indicates an  object “belonging to” women, whereas IF the sentence read the desire “FOR” women it would indicate “women” as the object.  IF the passage read (paraphrasing) “Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire FOR women…”  it would mean he doesn’t like women, as you assert.  The passage as written though indicates he has no regard for what women want which in context has to be some sort of idol-god.

 

 

John Too,

http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/may2012/johnt515.htm

 

Dan 11:37 KJV - [37] Neither shall he regard the God of his father’s, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

 

You will notice in the KJV that God is capitalized in the term “God of his father’s”, whereas “nor any god” is not.  The reason is, they are two different words.  The little g “god” is the Hebrew (Strong’s H433) elowahh in this context is obviously in reference to ANY false god, whereas “God” (capital G) is the Hebrew name Elohiym (Strong’s H430) which is a plurality with a singular meaning of our one true God;  In other words – the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit – The Trinity.  So by that specific name Elohiym we know the evil ruler will not regard the Father, the Son or the Holy Spirit.  There would be no need then for Daniel to repeat himself by referring to the Messiah as the “desire of women”. 

 

The whole passage is referring to our future or possibly present timeframe, THE END TIMES.  So to say the “desire of women” is in reference to a desire of women to bear thee Messiah would be patently false as our Messiah has already been born.  This passage is in reference to the end time evil ruler; So IF there are women still desiring to give birth to a messiah, that object of their desire would have to be a false messiah.  Therefore the person disregarded by the evil ruler would only be another false messiah disregarded, because the REAL Messiah has already been born.  If there are Hebrew women out there hoping to give birth to a messiah, it is a false messiah they are hoping to bear.  So again the only logical conclusion for the “desire of women”, in this context listing the various gods disregarded by the evil ruler, is an idol-god of the type described as desired by Rachel in Genesis 31:19-35.

 

In Christ,

Kevin H.