It’s a bunch of laughable bunk. The “facts” listed are blatantly false, like the claim that a pope declared himself “our Lord God the Pope”. That and so many other easily refuted myths, the whole website should be shunned.
Daniel shares a lot with the book of Revelation. Because the visions are written in symbols one can make anything out of them if they want to.The website is taking the fundamentalist anti-Catholic stance. It implicitly denies the material and historical aspect of the Church instead preaching a purely “spiritual kingdom”, because otherwise it would have to explain the time difference between Pentecost and the open preaching of fundamentalist beliefs. I’d stay away from websites like this and get a good Catholic commentary or study bible on the matter.
Anyway, the problem with this whole thing is that it is a conspiracy theory, on the same level as the 9/11 truthers and ancient alliens. Take this quote for instance:
The successor of St. Peter stands midway between God and man; below God, above man; Judge of all, judged of none
Where is the source for this? Well, we can trace this back through a whole bunch of anti-Catholic polemics, but not one ever gives a direct source for it.
Our Lord God the pope; another God upon earth, king of kings, and lord of lords. The same is the dominion of God and the pope. To believe that our Lord God the pope might not decree, as he decreed, it were a matter of heresy. The power of the pope is greater than all created power, and extends itself to things celestial, terrestrial, and infernal. The pope doeth whatsoever he listeth, even things unlawful, and is more than God (456).
I just skimmed through Newton’s text, and did not find this. Furthermore, notice how all quoted like these are all sourced in anti-Catholic polemics, and never on actual primary sources. If you can’t find a primary source, or even a non-polemical source, since these quotes are clearly meant to bash, its most likely that these quotes are made up lies.
What also should make you skeptical is how the author tosses out alternative interpretations of the prophecy without any reason, in order to justify his pet theory, which he uses to bash the Church.
Finally, most of the premises he’s basing his theories on assume that the Catholic Church is wrong (like his assumption of Scripture alone), which makes them fallacious when arguing against Catholicism.
I wouldn’t dwell on such nonsense: there are much better Protestant arguements I can some up with on the fly, that actaully make real arguements from Scripture and Tradition, and don’t make up information.
(note: the author seems to just be brainwashed by anti-Catholic propaganda: he didn’t make up the information up himself, but ignorantly accepted information made up by someone else, probably in a chain).
Ver. 8. Little horn. This is commonly understood of antichrist. It may also be applied to that great persecutor, Antiochus Epiphanes, as a figure of antichrist. (Challoner) — He was the youngest son of Antiochus the great, and was a hostage of Rome. While he was returning, his elder brother died, and Epiphanes excluded his son Philometor, of Egypt, and the usurper Heliodorus. He also defeated three, Philometor, on the south; Artaxias, king of Armenia, on the east; and the strength, or God’s people, ver 24., and chap. viii. 9. — Man. He gained several at first, by his affability. — Things: blasphemy, 1 Machabees i. 23, 43. (Calmet)
Dan. 2:44* But in the days of those kingdoms the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed, and his kingdom shall not be delivered up to another people, and it shall break in pieces, and shall consume all these kingdoms, and itself shall stand for ever.
Daniel prophesies an earthly kingdom that will never be destroyed. Either this is a false prophecy, or the earthly kingdom requires succession.
christiancourier.corn has no use for this verse, so they ignore it.