I answer a very good question from a listener in this episode about the recent study I did on Daniel 7 and its relationship to my Mystery Babylon study. It discusses the possibility that the antichrist will be Jewish and that he will present himself as the deliverer of Israel from their earthly enemies in a supposed fulfillment of Ezekiel 38-38

You can download a PDF of this text here

The Contemporaneous Beasts View of Daniel 7

By Chris White

Daniel 7 is considered by some to be the most important chapter in the book of Daniel, others even consider it the most important chapter in the entire Old Testament for reasons which we will get into later, but certainly one of those reasons is because of its prophetic significance.

In Daniel Chapter 7 Daniel has a vision of 4 beasts: a lion, bear, leopard and a “diverse beast”. These beasts are identified as kings and/or kingdoms by the angel who interprets Daniel’s dream starting in verse 17.

The question is which kingdoms are being referred to with these beasts.

Most conservatives believe that Daniel 7 is simply a retelling of Daniel 2. In other words the dream that Nebuchadnezzar had in Daniel 2 of a multi-metal statue which represented the four kingdoms of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome are again described here in Daniel 7.

I don’t agree with that view, but I do agree with them that the fourth beast in Daniel 7 is the kingdom of Antichrist, however because of their insistence that this chapter is simply a mirror image of Daniel 2, they are forced to defend the position that the Antichrist must somehow come from something they call the Revived Roman Empire (RRE) because in Daniel chapter 2 the last section of the statue is clearly talking about Rome, so if this chapter is the same as that one then the fourth beast is Rome.

But as I will demonstrate not only is that not necessary it could cause many people to miss the signs of the Antichrists kingdom. For more information on why the belief of the RRE is based on a bad exegesis of Daniel chapter 2, please see my video or audio on Daniel 2, which should be linked in the notes, that study should be considered a companion study to this one.

I would also recommend a 4 part paper by Charles Cooper who is a former professor of Hermeneutics at Moody Bible Institute called “Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 Equal or not Equal.”

In the traditional view the beasts of chapter 7 are succeeded in time by the next beast, for example, the lion, the first beast (who they say represents Babylon) would be followed after much time by the bear (who they say represents Medo-Persia) since Babylon was conquered by Medo-Persia, and then the leopard (Greece) would conquer the bear after that, and so on.  I believe there are significant reasons to challenge this view of the kingdoms being in temporal succession of one another. In other words to challenge the idea that these beasts existed one after the other instead of all at the same time.

In this study I will propose that this vision of the four beasts in Daniel 7 is not simply a picture of 4 kingdoms that have come and gone in the past, but rather this is a picture of the four kingdoms that will be on the earth at the same time when the Antichrist begins his reign. If this is the case, then this chapter, along with the latter half of Daniel 11 and Revelation 13 gives the church it’s best chance to recognize the geo-political precursors to the rise of Antichrist.

A large number of reasons for viewing these beasts as contemporaneous as opposed to successive will be presented in this study, but I will mention a few notable ones so that you can get an idea of the types of problems the traditional view has.

Daniel 7:11-12 describe the Antichrist who is thrown into the lake of fire after his reign is completed, few conservatives would debate this point, however after he is thrown into the lake of fire, the mentioning of the previous 3 beast show that they are still around at that time, in fact it says specifically that they are allowed to live on after that.

Dan 7:11  “I watched then because of the sound of the pompous words which the horn was speaking; I watched till the beast was slain, and its body destroyed and given to the burning flame.

Dan 7:12  As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.

In what sense can Neo-Babylonia or Medo-Persia be spoken of as living on after the anti-christ is destroyed. Traditional scholars give no compelling explanations for their presence and prolonging of their life at this point.  I will show you why the contemporaneous view explains this verse with many confirmations from the text.

Additionally there are several grammatical and contextual indications that make it plain that these kingdoms exist at the same time in history.

I will also be showing how not only does the traditional view contain no explicit evidence, the evidence it does present is often inconsistent and wrong.

The following then is an overview of the key points that we will find in this vision as understood by what I will call the contemporaneous beast view:

There is a dividing of the world into four parts in the time just before the antichrist begins his rule. The Antichrist eventually takes control of one of those four kingdoms which has 10 rulers, He eventually conquers all 4 kingdoms though war and effectively rules the entire world in a new amalgamated beast as seen in Revelation 13:1-2.

His initial ruling of only a fourth part of the earth is perhaps why in Revelation 6:8 power is given to “Death and Hades” over only a fourth part of the earth. This point is especially important if one understands that Revelation 6 may be the most complete description of the Antichrists torment of people before the wrath of God begins. In other words Revelation 6 would be the perfect place to describe the Antichrists dominion as only covering a fourth of the earth, even though he will eventually subdue all of the other 3 kings and control the entire world system, which brings me to my next point.

This view suggests that Daniel Chapter 11:36 and following essentially links Daniel chapter 7 with Revelation 13. Let me explain what I mean by all that, and it may take me a minute to do so, so bear with me.

Daniel 11:36-45 describes how the Antichrist will be conquering all kinds of lands and kingdoms, then at some point he will declare himself to be higher than God Himself in the “Holy Place” in Jerusalem, at that point the last 3.5 years of his reign will begin.  But before this, he is busy making war, conquering other kingdoms and establishing his domain. Here is a sampling of his military career during that time as told in Daniel 11

Dan 11:39  Thus he shall act against the strongest fortresses with a foreign god, which he shall acknowledge, and advance its glory; and he shall cause them to rule over many, and divide the land for gain.

Dan 11:40  “At the time of the end the king of the South shall attack him; and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter the countries, overwhelm them, and pass through.

Dan 11:41  He shall also enter the Glorious Land, and many countries shall be overthrown; but these shall escape from his hand: Edom, Moab, and the prominent people of Ammon.

Dan 11:42  He shall stretch out his hand against the countries, and the land of Egypt shall not escape.

Dan 11:43  He shall have power over the treasures of gold and silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; also the Libyans and Ethiopians shall follow at his heels.

Dan 11:44  But news from the east and the north shall trouble him; therefore he shall go out with great fury to destroy and annihilate many.

This is perhaps why the book of Revelation says that one of the reasons the world marvels at the Antichrist is because of his war making capability. They say of him in the Book of Revelation:

Rev 13:4  So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”

How it is that we have come to see the Antichrist as a man of peace I do not know. He will be a man of war without question.

Arguably the chapter that gives the most detail of the Antichrist is Revelation 13. The first two verses of that chapter say:

Rev 13:1  Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name.

Rev 13:2  Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority.

This is an unambiguous reference to our chapter in Daniel Chapter 7, the fact that we have a lion, bear, and leopard in the same place all in context of the Antichrist is enough pay attention, but when you see that it has 7 heads and 10 horns, a direct correlation to Daniel 7, the possibility of this being a coincidental similarity is not a reasonable option.

Let me show you why this is significant.

If you take the beasts in Daniel 7, that is a lion with wings, a bear, a four headed leopard, and a 10 horned beast, and you combined them all into one beast, you would have a 7 headed ten horned beast with characteristics of a bear, leopard and a lion, exactly what we see in Revelation 13.

In other words I am proposing to you that what you are looking at in the first few verses of Revelation 13 when a 7 headed, 10 horned lion/leopard/bear beast comes out of the sea, is the Antichrist, now done with his conquest of the other three world powers, and is the uncontested ruler of the word. Revelation 13 is understood by most conservatives to be the Antichrists final 3.5 years not his first 3.5 years.

So back to what I said earlier:  the view that I will be promoting the cotemporaneous beast view, suggests that Daniel Chapter 11:36-45 (which describes the wars of Antichrist) essentially links Daniel chapter 7 (The Antichrist pre-wars, where is Is only one of four powers) with Revelation 13 where he is the (uncontested ruler of all world powers).

So these 3 chapters  spread out all over the bible, more or less provide a before, during, and after conquests snapshot of the Antichrist.

And here in Daniel 7 it gives us details on what to look for in the world just prior to, and during the beginning of Antichrists assent to power. Daniel 11:36-45 gives us what his conquests of the other powers will look like. And Revelation 13 tells us what it will look like once he has gained complete control.

I will now begin to do a verse by verse exposition of this chapter.

Dan 7:1  In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream and visions of his head while on his bed. Then he wrote down the dream, telling the main facts.

In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon

Daniel gives us a time stamp of this vision; he says it is in the first year of Belshazzar, We might remember Belshazzar from chapter 5 and the writing on the wall episode. This may be significant as this would mean that this vision takes place well after Nebuchadnezzar’s death and only 10 or so years before Babylon would ultimately fall. We will discuss this as it relates to the first beast in a moment.

Then he wrote down the dream, telling the main facts.

Some translations say that Daniel tells us the “sum of the matter”, in other words there are details of this vision that were not given in this account, he instead gives us the most important or “main” facts.

Dan 7:2  Daniel spoke, saying, “I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the Great Sea.

Dan 7:3  And four great beasts came up from the sea, each different from the other.

The four winds of heaven were stirring up the Great Sea.

The picture of the Great Sea where these beasts come from is not debated much, as scripture in many places describes sinful humanity as the sea (cf. Isa 17:12–13; cp. Rev 13:1 with 13:11 and Rev 17:1 with 17:15).

The sea in which the beast (the Antichrist) sits and came out of in Rev 13 is interpreted by the angel in Revelation 17:15 as being representative of the people of the earth:

Rev 17:15  Then he said to me, “The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues.

Therefore these beast kingdoms arise from the water which represents humanity, in other words these four kingdoms are four kingdoms produced by humanity.

The four winds is often used to figuratively denote the entire known world in scripture Jer. 49:36; Dan 8:8; 11:4…Matt 24:31; and Mark 13:27; Targ[um] Isa 11:12.

The phrase the four winds is often associated in that context with the four cardinal points of the compass, I.E. North, South, East, and West, the cardinal points are even directly being referred to in several instances of the phrase the four winds in the book of Daniel: Daniel 8:8 and 11:4 Cooper in his paper spends a lot of time tying each of the four kingdoms here to a compass direction.

Here we also find one of the many grammatical clues that suggest that these four kingdoms will appear at the same time. The phrase “were stirring up” referring to the four winds stirring up the sea actually means bursting forth suddenly as opposed to over time. I will quote from Stephen Miller of the New American Commentary, who gives this fact even more weight because he holds to the traditional view and not the one I am proposing. He says:

“Four winds of heaven” were “churning up” the sea, as in a time of sudden storm. The participle “churning up” can also mean “bursting forth,”14 and the idea seems to be that these winds suddenly burst forth upon the sea.”[i]

So I would suggest that this verse is saying that there will be four kingdoms produced in four different parts of the earth quite suddenly.

Dan 7:4  The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings. I watched till its wings were plucked off; and it was lifted up from the earth and made to stand on two feet like a man, and a man’s heart was given to it.

The traditional view has this beast being Babylon, and specifically, Nebuchadnezzar. For example they say that wings being plucked off,  and its being made to stand on two feet, and given a heart of a man is referring to the humbling experience that God gave to Nebuchadnezzar in Chapter 4 where Nebuchadnezzar was forced to act like an OX for several years until he recognized the sovrenty of God and then was restored to his right mind.

This part of the interpretation has many problems, the first being that Nebuchadnezzar was dead at the time of this vision based on verse 1, and it seems strange therefore, that Daniel would see Nebuchadnezzar coming out of the sea, and providing more details about his life or kingdom.

The picture the traditional view paints is that the lion represents Nebuchanezzar when he was forced to act like a beast and then the plucking of the lions wings, making it stand on two feet, and giving it a man’s heart is symbolic of God restoring Nebuchadnezzar to his right mind at the end of Daniel 4. This would suggest that the reason for these four beings being described as “beasts” is because of similar situations like that of Nebuchadnezzars. Are we to understand then that the king of Medo-Persia or Greece or Rome are also described as beasts because they too were forced to act like beasts by God?  If so, they were apparently not restored to sanity as Nebuchadnezzar was, since no man’s heart was given to them.

The description of the first beast  here in Daniel 7 doesn’t really even fit what happened to Nebuchadnezzar in chapter 4. The clear intent in Daniel 7 is that the lion was always a lion, but was given a “mans heart” and thus changed. The lion was not restored to its natural state by the plucking of its wings and making it stand on two feet. It was permanently transformed and the intent of the text as we will see, is that it was  a downgrade for the lion not an upgrade. Nebuchadnezzar’s  situation was exactly reversed if you analyze this closely.

And again we have the problem of continuity, if the reason the first beast is a beast is because of Nebuchadnezzar thinking he was an ox once, where does that leave us hermeneutically if we are trying to be consistent with the other beasts.

Surely the term “beast” is to be understood the same way it is understood in other prophetic scriptures, that is a way to denote a usually evil, nation or king.

The traditional view also will say things like “the winged lion is the traditional symbol for Babylon, evidence of this can be seen on the Ishtar Gate from Babylon”

To start out with there is no evidence to suggest that winged lions were considered to be a symbol of Babylon. Lions in general, regardless of wings were associated, not with Babylon but with the goddess Ishtar, this is partly because of the reference to her loving lions in the Epic of Gilgamesh which states of Ishtar:

“’Thou has loved the lion, mighty in strength’”

For this reason Ishtar was often depicted with lions in sculptures and reliefs, only occasionally are the lions winged and for reasons we will get to later. This is why lions appear on the famous Ishtar gate of Babylon, because of their association with Ishtar, but Ishtar was not even the main goddess of Babylon. She was in some traditions however considered to be married to Marduk, who was the main god of Babylon thereby making her the queen of Babylon by marriage in those traditions.

There are other winged animals on the gate like the bull though most of the bulls do not have wings, in fact the other two animals depicted on the gate (bulls, and dragons) vastly outnumber the lions, There were 120 lions compared to 575 dragons and bulls. Incidentally Nebuchadnezzar was really proud of the bulls and dragons on the front of the gate (where you wont find any lions, he even mentions them specifically in his inscription about why he built the gate, but he does not mention the lions at all)

All that to say that many commentators who try to make this point that winged lions are symbols of Babylon do so despite the historical evidence that winged lions are quite simply not symbols of Babylon at all, and when they do show up in Babylon they exceedingly rare, most of the lions depicted are without wings, and wings or not, lions are almost exclusively associated with Ishtar who is only tangentially related to the neo-Babylonian kingdom, and by most accounts was only a minor goddess in the neo-Babylonian culture. And to make matters worse, She was a goddess who’s worship, and association with lions, goes back 1000 of years before this to a different kingdom altogether.

People trying to make this winged lion in verse 4 be Babylon are often thinking of the so called Lamassu . A Lamassu is a representation of a protective deity, not from Babylon but rather thousands of years before this in the Akkadian and then Assyrian kingdoms. And although there are occasions where a Lamassu have been depicted with lions bodies, the vast majority of them are with bulls bodies. There is some evidence that the Assyrian tradition of putting Lamassu, their protective deities, on city gates was why certain animals on other gates in later periods were given wings, as a kind of tip of the hat to the older Akkadian traditions regarding these protective deities.

So the problems with the idea that winged lions are symbols of Babylon are as follows: They are not symbols of Babylon according to the Babylonians, and are never referred to as such that I know of in their writings,  the Ishtar gate has lions on it because lions are a symbol of Ishtar, and even then they are not depicted on the gate nearly as much as the other animals. The concept of Lamassu was mostly represented with a bulls body and had virtually nothing to do with Babylon since they were Assyrian.

I also think this interpretation causes a hermeneutical problem as well. If one is going to say that we should look for a cultures symbol for itself to decipher the following beast kingdoms then how are we to deal with the rest of the beasts. There is not a shred of evidence that for example, the Medo-Persians symbolized themselves with a bear, I don’t even think any traditional commentators try to suggest this, probably because of the obvious lack evidence, nor did Greece make statues or reliefs symbolizing itself as a leopard, let alone Rome as the crazy beast that Daniel describes in this chapter.

In other words if your going to say that the deciphering of the beasts/kingdoms in Daniel 7 can be done by looking at the artwork of the kingdom in question, and seeing what symbols they described themselves with, then it needs to be consistent, we would expect in that case, to find at least some evidence that a similar hermeneutic could be applied to the other beasts/kingdoms, but that as we will see is not even attempted by those promoting the traditional view.

There is a similar problem with the next point which is brought up by proponents of the traditional view. Which is that Nebuchadnezzar is called both a lion and an eagle in scripture, this is the best of the point that the traditional view has to offer in favor of their view for any of the four beasts, but even so it should be considered that scripture also calls Shalmaneser, the king of Assyria, a lion and an eagle too in Hosea 8:1 and Jeremiah 50:17.

A simple study of the usage of lions or eagles or any other beast in scripture will reveal that they are used to designate characteristics and are often widely interchangeable among individuals or nations as long as those individuals or nations display the characteristics of that animal described in scripture.  For example when used in a negative sense in scripture, lions are, among other things, strong ( Pr 30:30 ), fearless ( Prov 28:1 ; 30:30 ), stealthy ( Psalm 17:12 ), frightening ( Ezra 19:7 ; Hosea 11:10 ; Amos 3:8 ), destructive ( 1 Sam 17:34 ; Micah 5:8 ), and territorially protective ( Isa 31:4 ).

Satan is described as walking around like a lion seeking whom he may devour.

The same can be done with eagles, according to one Bible Encyclopedia is:

“ ..Referred to for its swiftness of flight (Deut. 28:49; 2 Sam. 1:23), its mounting high in the air (Job 39:27), its strength (Ps. 103:5), its setting its nest in high places (Jer. 49:16), and its power of vision (Job 39:27-30)

This “ravenous bird” is a symbol of those nations whom God employs and sends forth to do a work of destruction, sweeping away whatever is decaying and putrescent (Matt. 24:28; Isa. 46:11; Ezek. 39:4; Deut. 28:49; Jer. 4:13; 48:40).

So consider that when Lions or Eagles are used of kings, it is used of different kings and often different kingdoms, but the unifying factor is that they were instruments of God in the judgment of Israel, and displayed the characteristics of the animals laid out in scripture.

Again  the traditional view would fail at the point of trying to apply this hermeneutic to the other 3 beasts. For example there is no reference to Alexander the Great or Greece as a leopard in scripture, or to Cyrus /or Medo-Persia as a bear.

I would suggest that we should attempt to interpret the first beast the same as we would with the others, and the most scriptural way to do that is by understanding the symbolism of the beasts by the different characteristics of that particular animal provided by scripture.

The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings.

A kingdom that is like a lion and has wings like and eagle would seem to suggest a strong and swift nation, 2 Samuel 1:23 says:

2Sa 1:23  “Saul and Jonathan were beloved and pleasant in their lives, And in their death they were not divided; They were swifter than eagles, They were stronger than lions.

We could go on to apply the other characteristics of these two animals to these beasts for more clarity, but I think the important part in terms of interpretation comes with the following lines:

I watched till its wings were plucked off; and it was lifted up from the earth and made to stand on two feet like a man, and a man’s heart was given to it.

I think that both the wings being plucked off as well as the lion being forced to act like a man are to be understood as downgrades, or a bad thing, for this kingdom, not an upgrade.

The wings being plucked is pretty obvious, If the kingdom was swift like an eagle but its wings were plucked it would not be to the nations advantage.

The being given a man’s heart should in my opinion be understood as having its lions heart changed into a weaker heart. Scripture is clear that a lions heart is better than a mans in regard to boldness or fearlessness.

2Sa 17:10  And even he who is valiant, whose heart is like the heart of a lion, will melt completely. For all Israel knows that your father is a mighty man, and those who are with him are valiant men.

Pro 28:1  The wicked flee when no one pursues, But the righteous are bold as a lion.

So If I was looking for this kingdom I would be looking for a kingdom who was strong and fast, but their swiftness was taken away from them, and they were not as bold as they once were.

Charles Cooper in his paper on this subject ties the Lion King here to the King of the south in Daniel Chapter 11 which will attack the Antichrist in verse 40 but will pose no problem for the Antichrist who will easily subdue him.

It is not my goal in this study to provide the interpretation of which modern day nations or coalition of nations are represented here. I am not sure that we have seen the referent on the world scene yet, and more political maneuverings might be necessary before these verses can be applied to their geopolitical counterparts.

I am doing this study so that others will be able to make the connections when the time comes. I am not saying that it is not worth looking for right now, but it is not obvious to me if the national referents can be known, though that could be because of my lack of information about geopolitics, or because the referents are not yet in the form being described here. But one thing I am sure of is that when it comes it will be obvious if you are looking for it, and we don’t have to look for cryptic fulfillments of these prophecies, if you have the right interpretation it will click, and if you don’t, it wont.

Dan 7:5  “And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear. It was raised up on one side, and had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And they said thus to it: ‘Arise, devour much flesh!’

The next beast Daniel describes is like a bear, in the traditional view this must be Medo-Persia because again they believe that this is a retelling of Daniel 2 in which the second part of the statue is indeed Medo-Persia.

As we have already noted none of the ideas they apply to the Lion work for the bear. There is nothing to indicate any medo-persian king had a humbling experience which made them think like a beast, nor is there any indication whatsoever that the medo-persian empire identified itself symbolically or any other way with a bear, and there is never a reference to any medo-persian king as a bear in scripture.

It was raised up on one side

Proponents of the traditional view will say that the bear being raised up on one side is symbolic of the uneven relationship between the Medes and Persians in their coalition, the Medes were initially the dominant party but later the Persians were the more dominant of the two parts of this empire.

It should be noted that the word “raised up” here is passive, that is that it was raised up on one side by another force not of its own doing, much like the Lion having its wings plucked and being stood up etc. this bear is being raised up on one side by another party, probably also the group that is ordering it to devour much flesh. it says: And they said thus to it: ‘Arise, devour much flesh!’ the they here could be a reference to the winds of the earth which stir up the sea in verse 1.

and had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth.

The three ribs in its mouth according to the traditional view represent three notable conquests of the Medo-Persian Empire. But because there are more than three notable conquests of the Medo-Persian empire there is much argument among those holding to this view as to which three should be considered the most important. I of course don’t think this has anything to do with the Medo-Persian Empire and so we should not concern ourselves with why this is not a perfect description of their military conquests, that is because it isn’t.

One interesting verse is found in Hosea 13:7-8 in which God describes himself as all of the beasts in this chapter, the only other time these beasts are found together other than in Revelation 13, and I think it will give us an idea of what these ribs are:

Hos 13:7  “So I will be to them like a lion; Like a leopard by the road I will lurk;

Hos 13:8  I will meet them like a bear deprived of her cubs; I will tear open their rib cage, And there I will devour them like a lion. The wild beast shall tear them.

The bear here is described as tearing open a rib cage, and so I think the basic hermeneutic applied to the bear by the traditional view is correct, that is the ribs represent initial conquests by this kingdom that are three in number.

I would also note that almost every time a bear is figured in scripture the idea of it being, as it says here “deprived of her cubs” is mentioned. That is the biblical bear is the most ferocious when its offspring is threatened, This is such a consistent thing that I would be surprised if the nation or nations that the bear represents is not acting out of a real or perceived sense of defense.

And they said thus to it: ‘Arise, devour much flesh!’

I think that this phrase is very important as it helps to weaken the case that this beast represents Medo-Persia, because after the conquests of Cyrus the great and his son Cambyses II, which occurred relatively quickly and very early in the medio Persian history, there would be 200 years of no conquering at all until the empire was defeated by Alexander the Great. The empire would spend most of its existence simply struggling to maintain the lands that were initially conquered for it, by Cyrus and his son in the first few years.

So if this bear already with the main conquests in its mouth is supposed to be Medo-Persia, then it either chose not go and devour anymore flesh, as it was ordered to, or it is simply not talking about the Medo-Persian Empire.

Charles Cooper connects the bear King to the King of the North in Daniel 11 who is said to try to make war with the Antichrist: it says:

Dan 11:40b  “… and the king of the North shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, horsemen, and with many ships; and he [the Antichrist] shall enter the countries, overwhelm them, and pass through.

In the past people have tried to make the “King of the north” in Daniel 11 be Russia, this was due more to Russian being the current geopolitical “boogey man” at the time that Hal Lindsey wrote his books than to any reason from the text.

Dr. J Paul Tanner Professor of Hebrew and Old Testament Studies at the Jordan Evangelical Theological Seminary wrote an article called “Daniel’s ‘King of the North’: Do We Owe Russia An Apology?” he concludes:

“To be hermeneutically consistent, the “king of the North” ought to be interpreted in light of the meaning the phrase has had throughout the chapter.”

Tanner has a very logical argument, and I would highly recommend his paper to you. He ultimately concludes this way:

“I would like to submit that the “King of the North” is a confederation of northern Arab nations that will attack the Antichrist and his forces in this military conflict centered in the Middle East”

So like the Lion, I am not prepared to suggest to you the specific nations that are represented by the bear, but I think it’s highly likely that to go looking for it in the current climate would be a fruitless endeavor, as I believe these coalitions will arise quickly and possibly as a result of factors that have not yet occurred or are only beginning to occur. That being said I would not let that keep any of you for being watchmen in this regard.

Dan 7:6  “After this I looked, and there was another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird. The beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it.

The leopard with four bird wings and four heads is the Greek empire in the traditional view, again it has the same problems as the bear, as Alexander the Great was not humbled by having his mind turned into a beasts mind, nor is the symbol of the leopard associated with the Greek Empire nor is  Alexander the Great or Greece  referred to as a leopard in the bible.

I would agree with them however that the four wings on the leopard probably represent a very fast moving empire.

One of the biggest problems with this view is the four heads of this beast, the traditional proponents say that these heads represent the four generals who Alexander the Great gave his Empire to after he died.

Even a casual student of history knows that the Greek Empire did nothing but diminish and diminish greatly after Alexander the Great died. The traditional view then has scripture attributing the fast and ferocious conquests of the Grecian Empire to the four generals; no mention of Alexander is present. This is problematic to say the least Even if you were to assume that Alexander was somehow involved, perhaps he was the torso, to give such prominence to the generals is completely inconsistent with history and with the way that scripture uses the head/kingdoms motif.

Cooper makes the case that the Leopard is speaking of the King of the East, or the source of the “news” from the east that will trouble the Antichrist in Daniel 11:44 but who it appears Antichrist will also subdue.

Dan 11:44  But news from the east and the north shall trouble him; therefore he shall go out with great fury to destroy and annihilate many.

How does scripture speak of leopards?

They tear into pieces (Jer 5:6), Swift (Hab 1:8), Lie in wait for its prey (Jer 5:6, Hos 13:7)

I think we are looking for an exceedingly fast coalition of 4 kings or Kingdoms or even four leaders of the same kingdom. It may make an agreement with the king of the North, and because of the consistent use in scripture I think this kingdom will have some quality that can be described as lying in wait, or being patient before striking.

the leopard is found only about 6 times in scripture and the only time it seems to apply to any nation or king is in Revelation 13, where we see that all four of the beasts have been combined as they rise out of the sea for the final 3.5 years of Antichrists rule, suggesting again that we are to understand these kingdoms in Daniel 7 as somehow being represented again all the way in Revelation 13.

Dan 7:7  “After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong. It had huge iron teeth; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns.

Dan 7:8  I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words.

Here the traditional view has Rome in view. All of their reasons for this are very general and can apply to any of the previous kingdoms, that is strength and being fearful because of its might. I think any and every world empire would be able to claim these characteristics; the idea that it was different from the previous ones also can be applied to any kingdom on the list depending on how you define different.

There are major differences in the fourth empire described here and the last empire described in the statue vision back in Daniel 2, For instance in this verse the strength of the empire is clearly the main focus, not a hint of weakness is detected, contrast that with the last empire of Daniel 2 in which the bible spends verse after verse describing the divided nature and inherent weakness of that kingdom. I would call that a very big difference, the one in Daniel 2 is divided and weak and the one in Daniel 7 is described as invincible.

The main thing that people see as the clincher here in the reference to the 10 horns which they say corresponds to the ten toes in Daniel 2. But I beg the reader to realize that there is no mention of 10 toes in Daniel 2. That idea has been read back into the text by people who assume these two chapters are the same.

In chapter 2 the feet and toes are one unit, a fact easily demonstrated not just by the descriptions of them being one unit in the text, but also by the rock striking the feet, not the toes in order to destroy it.

If the Bible wanted to make a big deal out of the ten toes it would have said “by the way there are ten toes, but it does not, there is no mention of the number of toes in the text. For example I believe we are supposed to pay attention to the 3 ribs in the bears mouth and in the next chapter the 2 horns on the rams head or even the ten horns on the this beasts head, but when a number is not mentioned we should not read them into the text. For example no one tried to draw attention to the 10 fingers on the hands of the statue which represents medo-persia, because there is no correlation there, it is taking the analogy too far. We wouldn’t note that there are two eyes and ears on the head either, when the bible is silent we should be too.

That being said I do have some agreement with the traditional view at this point, in that I think that the kingdom that the Antichrist comes from will have 10 kings because of this passage in Daniel 7, and because of its interpretation by the angel which we will get to later.

Perhaps it might even like representatives of the European Union or a similar organization, and he will subdue three of them before ultimately talking over the whole organization, I think that this organization will be associated with the west in some way as does Charles Cooper, but it is not required to be the Revived Roman Empire. And I hope that if someone has the time they will see my study on Daniel 2 to find out why I say that.

There are two grammatical clues in this verse that support the overall premise that the four beasts are contemporaneous and not successive.

The first is the use of the word “before” in verse 7:

“It was different from all the beasts that were before it”

The word “before” here is the Aramaic word qodam which is only used in a special sense and never in a temporal sense.

In other words it is never used in the time sense, like “he tied his shoes before he ran” it is only used in the sense of being in front of something, like I put some food before the king.

One example of how this word is used is in Daniel 2:25

Dan 2:25  Then Arioch quickly brought Daniel before the king, and said thus to him, “I have found a man of the captives of Judah, who will make known to the king the interpretation.”

There is a totally different word if you wanted to speak of something happening before something else as in time.

So when it says “It was different from all the beasts that were before it” it must mean grammatically  that the other beast are spatially in front of it. Which means that these beast must be on the earth at the same time.

This brings me to my the second grammatical clue in this verse:

This phrase trampling the residue with its feet. We will see that this also supports the idea that these beasts are contemporaneous.

Charles Cooper says the following on this point:

“The importance of the translation of this verse is evident by examining several Bible translations:

A fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron

teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet

(NASB).

A fourth beast, terrifying and dreadful and exceedingly strong. It had great iron

teeth; it devoured and broke in pieces and stamped what was left with its feet

(ESV).

a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron

teeth: it devoured and broke in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it

(1895-KJV).

a fourth  beast – terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron

teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was

left (NIV).

The reader should discern that the translations, with the exception of the NIV, place the final  clause as the object of all three verbs. Does “what was left” go with the final verb to stamp or with all three verbs: to devour, to break in pieces, and to stamp? The answer to this question along with the question regarding the meaning of the clause “what was left” support our contention that the four kings/kingdoms of Daniel 7 reign upon the earth at the same time. If the clause “what was left” applies only to the verb to stamp, we would have to conclude that the clause refers to the things the beast did not devour or break in pieces. In other words, “what was left” is everything else the beast is not able to devour or break in pieces. If the beast could not “eat” it or “break” it, he stamped on it.

The other option is to take “what was left” as the object of all three verbs: to devour, to break in pieces, and to stamp, which is reflected in most translations. Taken in this sense, “what was left”

represents everything the first three beasts do not control. In other words, the four kings/kingdoms divided the world up between them. The lion-king, the bear-king, the leopard king, and the diverse-king each get a fourth… In context, “what was left” is best taken to refer to

that part of the earth that did not fall under the control of the first three beasts/kings/kingdoms.”

Dan 7:8  I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words.

I would have an identical interpretation of this verse than most conservative scholars. There are many points that are made of this little horn that are clearly talking about the Antichrist, He appears to start his accent to power by doing something to three of the 10 kings, this too would be something that should be quite evident to the watchman when it happens.

Dan 7:9  “I watched till thrones were put in place, And the Ancient of Days was seated; His garment was white as snow, And the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was a fiery flame, Its wheels a burning fire;

Dan 7:10  A fiery stream issued And came forth from before Him. A thousand thousands ministered to Him; Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him. The court was seated, And the books were opened.

Dan 7:11  “I watched then because of the sound of the pompous words which the horn was speaking; I watched till the beast was slain, and its body destroyed and given to the burning flame. 

Daniel now sort of shifts his attention to a new character in the vision. The Ancient of Days, this is a reference to YHWH, though the same description is applied to Jesus in Revelation. Later we will see the Son of Man whom Jesus identified with interacting with the Ancient of Days. This is one of the go to passages for the “two powers in heaven” idea which is described well by Dr. Michael Hesier, and there is much to discuss about it, but it is out of the scope of our study which is focused on the prophetic implications of this passage so I will leave you to study this further which I highly recommend.

Daniel is now going to watch the Ancient of Days destroy the beast with the little horn by giving it to the burning flame.

These verses are very important for our discussion, because they correspond directly to events in the Book of Revelation.

If we compare the two books we will see that Daniel is giving us very specific information about the timing of the events being described in this chapter.

Let’s start with the first phrase I watched till thrones were put in place.

I will read from the last part of Revelation 19 to the first part of Revelation 20, remember there are no chapter breaks in the original languages and I want you to notice a few different things that correspond directly to our verse.

First you will see the Antichrist is cast into the lake of fire, just as it happens in our passage:

Rev 19:20  Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.

Then we read that thrones are set up after that, which corresponds with Daniel as well.

Rev 20:4a  And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them..

These thrones are for some or all believers in Christ who will judge angels and men at this time, Paul says the following in 1 Corinthinans:

1Co 6:2  Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?

1Co 6:3  Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

The comparisons to the time just before the millennial reign of Christ are very important and Daniel will continue to make unambiguous references to it as we will see. One reason I want to show you this is because I think it helps to explain the next verse:

Dan 7:12  As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.

As for the rest of the beasts

There is no doubt that the other beasts of Daniel 7 are in view here, that is the lion the bear and the leopard. It says that their dominion is taken away but their lives are prolonged for a time.

This verse is very difficult to get around if you still hold the traditional view because the other beasts are long gone by this point. Stephen Miller of the New American Commentary who holds to the traditional view offers the following to try to explain this most serious problem:

“How could these beasts lose their authority and still exist? The explanation is that their dominance ceased, but they continued to live because they were absorbed into the next empire. For example, Greece was conquered by Rome; and although Greek dominance came to an end, the nation continued to live by being absorbed into another one of the earthly kingdoms, the Roman Empire.”

Miller, Stephen  B. (1994-08-31). The New American Commentary Volume 18 – Daniel (p. 206). B&H Publishing. Kindle Edition.

So according to Miller when Daniel says As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time. He means that there would still be Neo-Babylonian or Medo-Persian blood on the earth in the last days. Which is almost impossible to believe, for purely genetic reasons, This also presumes that the Bible sees kingdoms in a purely ethnic sense which is very difficult when dealing with kingdoms like the Romans who were very ethnically diverse.

I have another explanation for this problem, that is simply what the bible says is true.

After the Antichrist is destroyed at Armageddon there will still be people and indeed nations on earth who will populate the 1000 year period after the sheep and goat judgment, this has explicit biblical support.

We know that there will be specifically identifiable nations in the millennium, for example in Zechariah 14:16-19 Egypt is mentioned. In fact in that same passage it specifically says that some of the same nations that were a part of the final battles would be serving the lord during this time:

“And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King.

One more interesting fact about this is the mentions of some of the animals which represent nations in Daniel chapter 7 being  mentioned in the verses about the 1000 years perisod in Isaiah 11

Isa 11:6  “The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, The leopard shall lie down with the young goat, The calf and the young lion and the fatling together; And a little child shall lead them.

Isa 11:7  The cow and the bear shall graze; Their young ones shall lie down together; And the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

We shouldn’t build doctrine on things like that, but given the other scriptures I think it is very interesting.

Dan 7:13  “I was watching in the night visions, And behold, One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, And they brought Him near before Him.

Dan 7:14  Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, That all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And His kingdom the one Which shall not be destroyed.

One like the Son of Man, Coming with the clouds of heaven!

This again is pointing to the specific period of time in which these event happen, this vision of the son of man is not out of chronological context with the destruction of the final beast. This phrase “one like the son of man coming on the clouds” is a technical term used very often by the Lord and it is referring not to the rapture but rather to Revelation 14:14-20 in which the cloud rider and the angels destroy the wicked earth dwellers

Rev 14:14  Then I looked, and behold, a white cloud, and on the cloud sat One like the Son of Man, having on His head a golden crown, and in His hand a sharp sickle.

Rev 14:15  And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to Him who sat on the cloud, “Thrust in Your sickle and reap, for the time has come for You to reap, for the harvest of the earth is ripe.”

Rev 14:16  So He who sat on the cloud thrust in His sickle on the earth, and the earth was reaped.

Rev 14:17  Then another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle.

Rev 14:18  And another angel came out from the altar, who had power over fire, and he cried with a loud cry to him who had the sharp sickle, saying, “Thrust in your sharp sickle and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth, for her grapes are fully ripe.”

Rev 14:19  So the angel thrust his sickle into the earth and gathered the vine of the earth, and threw it into the great winepress of the wrath of God.

Rev 14:20  And the winepress was trampled outside the city, and blood came out of the winepress, up to the horses’ bridles, for one thousand six hundred furlongs.

Other references to this occasion of “one like the son of man” coming on the clouds for the purpose of judgment can be found in Mat_13:41,Mat_26:64; Mar_13:26, Mar_14:61-62; Luk_21:27

I am making a distinction between this coming on the clouds event in Daniel 7 and Revelation 14 from the rapture which happens a significant amount of time before this event. The rapture is described in similar terms but there are distinct differences. I think it is proper to look at this as two reaping events, one for the righteous called the rapture and a later on for the destruction of the wicked typified by verses like this:

Mat 13:41  The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness,

Mat 13:42  and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

All of this to say that this chronology would constitute further proof that the allowing of the other 3 kingdoms to live on after this time must be a reference to the millennium based on the context, and that the other 3 kingdoms must therefore all be on the earth at the same time, and therefore the traditional interpretation of these beasts must be wrong.

Dan 7:15  “I, Daniel, was grieved in my spirit within my body, and the visions of my head troubled me.

Dan 7:16  I came near to one of those who stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me and made known to me the interpretation of these things: 

Daniel is shaken up by the vision; he asks a heavenly being to help him understand it. He is then given the heavenly interpretation of the vision so we can now check our interpretation with that of the angels and make sure our interpretations lines up with scriptures.

Dan 7:17  ‘Those great beasts, which are four, are four kings which arise out of the earth.

Dan 7:18  But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.’

The angel starts by giving a very broad overview of the vision. It is summed up in only two verses.

‘Those great beasts, which are four, are four kings which arise out of the earth.

The first thing that the angels does is confirm that these beasts represent kings or kingdoms, later on in verses 23 and 24 the angel refers to these beasts as kingdoms not just kings. It is therefore almost universally accepted that “kings” and “kingdoms” are interchangeable in much of Daniels prophetic writing.

The angel then jumps all the way to the end to declare that these four kingdoms will  be displaced ultimately by the kingdom given to the saints of the most high.

But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.’

This mention of the saints receiving a kingdom is extremely important; this event is specifically noted 3 more times in this chapter. It is a probably a reference to the saints who rule with Christ during the millennial reign as in Revelation 20:4

Rev 20:4  And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

It is a fulfillment of the promise of the Lord in the letters to the seven churches in Revelation:

Rev 2:26  And he who overcomes, and keeps My works until the end, to him I will give power over the nations—

Rev 2:27  ‘HE SHALL RULE THEM WITH A ROD OF IRON; THEY SHALL BE DASHED TO PIECES LIKE THE POTTER’S VESSELS’— as I also have received from My Father;

So once again we have specific language regarding the millennial kingdom giving us a time stamp for these events in Daniel 7.

Dan 7:19  “Then I wished to know the truth about the fourth beast, which was different from all the others, exceedingly dreadful, with its teeth of iron and its nails of bronze, which devoured, broke in pieces, and trampled the residue with its feet;

Dan 7:20  and the ten horns that were on its head, and the other horn which came up, before which three fell, namely, that horn which had eyes and a mouth which spoke pompous words, whose appearance was greater than his fellows.

Daniel inquires to the angel to know more about the fourth beast and little horn.

A few extra details are mentioned in this recapping of the events of the vision that were not mentioned initially for example the beast had:

“Nails of bronze”

So in addition to iron teeth, nails of bronze are mentioned. Based on the other uses of bronze or brass in scripture I would suggest this simply means the feet will be strong, a very similar use of bronze feet or in this case hooves smashing things can be seen in Micah 4:13:

Mic 4:13  “Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion; For I will make your horn iron, And I will make your hooves bronze; You shall beat in pieces many peoples; I will consecrate their gain to the LORD, And their substance to the Lord of the whole earth.”

This extra detail of bronze feet may help someone find out which nations or coalition of nations are in view in the fourth beast, or it may simply be just a symbolic way to show the ability and skill the nation has at destroying.

Dan 7:21  “I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them,

Dan 7:22  until the Ancient of Days came, and a judgment was made in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom.

and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them

another detail is mentioned here by Daniel that was not mentioned before, that is that this horn made war against the saints and prevailed against them. This is a clear reference to the Antichrist in Revelation 13:7:

Rev 13:7  It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.

And the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom

This is another reference to the saints receiving a the millennial kingdom, there will be at least one more such reference in verse 27 showing the theological importance of the idea that the saints will be given the dominion that is taken from the Antichrist.

Dan 7:23  “Thus he said: ‘The fourth beast shall be A fourth kingdom on earth, Which shall be different from all other kingdoms, And shall devour the whole earth, Trample it and break it in pieces.

The angel is now interpreting the fourth beast for Daniel, it too is a kingdom, it is again noted that it is different in some way from the other kingdoms, though we are not told how. The new information that the angel gives us is that this beast will ultimately devour the whole earth which is also noted of the Antichrist in Revelation 13:7-8

Dan 7:24  The ten horns are ten kings Who shall arise from this kingdom. And another shall rise after them; He shall be different from the first ones, And shall subdue three kings.

We learn many things here, first that the ten horns on the fourth kingdoms head were ruling the kingdom first.

I suggest this could be very much like a European Union form of government where many representatives, rule over one kingdom equally, So it wouldn’t have to be the EU, but something similar that could develop quite quickly.

The angel then tells us that three of the ten will be subdued, some translations say humiliated, the root word means to make lower, or humble, if it weren’t for the initial vision showing them uprooted suggesting a complete disregarding of them I would suggest based on the word itself that these kings are simply put in a much lower place by the antichrist, though I am not dogmatic on any of these points at this time.

Dan 7:25  He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, Shall persecute the saints of the Most High, And shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand For a time and times and half a time.

He shall speak pompous words against the Most High

Speaking blasphemies against God is a very consistent description of the Antichrist in scripture:

Dan_7:8, Dan_7:20, Dan_8:24-25, Dan_11:28, Dan_11:30-31, Dan_11:36-37; Isa_37:23; 2Th_2:4; Rev_13:5-6, Rev_13:11

Shall persecute the saints of the Most High

The persecution of saints by the AC is mentioned almost as many times as the blasphemies as defining characteristics of the antichrist.

Rev_6:9-10, Rev_11:7-10, Rev_13:7-10, Rev_14:12, Rev_16:6, Rev_17:6, Rev_18:24

And shall intend to change times and law

The word “times” and “law” here are pretty general and they are used a number of different ways in scripture. Times is sometimes rendered “seasons”, and law can mean a decree from God, or from man and it is used both ways.  In my research I tried to find some pattern of their usage in scripture, but came to the conclusion that the interpretation of this phrase is more simple than complex.

Some people say that this changing of the times and seasons is related to antichrist changing or taking away the holidays like Christmas or Passover for the Jews.

I think that there are several possibilities for this and I will list a few of my best guesses.

1. That the changing of the times and seasons is a reference to the many instances of reforms that we are told the AC makes in the end times, Some examples being his forbidding to marry and the commanding to abstain from foods (1 Tim 4:3) (though this is only said to happen in the “last days” it is not necessarily attributed to the AC) his ending of the daily sacrifices  (Dan_12:11; 2Th_2:4) his causing all people to receive a mark in order to buy or sell (rev 13:16)

1. It could also be a reference to his trying to increase the time he is given by God to persecute the saints, that is 3.5 years. Almost every time this period of persecution is spoken of it is mentions that the time is given to him and allotted to him by God. We know that Satan does not want his time to be limited to 3.5 years and in fact in Revelation 12:12 we are told that one of the reason his wrath will be so great is because he knows his time is short. One of the reasons I suggest that this might be a reference to his attempt to lengthen his time is because of the context, this idea is sandwiched contextually with 3.5 year persecution references, in addition one point might be made that it says that he only “intends” or attempts to change the time and decree, it could be that he is never successful at this attempt.

I think either of these is a valid argument, or it could be a reference to something altogether different.

Then the saints shall be given into his hand For a time and times and half a time.

This is a reference to the 3.5 year time period given to the antichrist to persecute the saints. In the original language it is clear that the time times and half a time essentially means 3.5 years, but thankfully this time period in confirmed in many way thorough scripture. One almost identical verse to this one is found in Revelation 13:5, it says:

Rev 13:5  And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months.

This 3.5 years begins when the AC declares himself to be higher than God in the temple in Jerusalem. Jesus describes how the greatest persecution that the world has ever seen will begin immediately after this event in Matthew 24.

Some say that the saints here is only a reference to those left after the rapture, that is people saved after the rapture. But people that believe this believe it without a scriptural basis. And I would suggest that it is in direct conflict with many verses such as 2 Thessalonians 2:1-11, Matthew 24: 29-31.

The church will see the persecution of Antichrist, which will begin at the midpoint of the 7 year period, but at some unknown point after that time the church will be raptured out of that persecution and the wrath of God or the Day of the Lord will begin on the wicked on that same day. This is the standard prewrath view which I and many other hold to.

Dan 7:26  ‘But the court shall be seated, And they shall take away his dominion, To consume and destroy it forever.

A reference to the judgment of Antichrist.

Dan 7:27  Then the kingdom and dominion, And the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, Shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, And all dominions shall serve and obey Him.’

It is interesting that this chapter has been so emphatic that the kingdom is given to the saints of the most high, in many ways the bible is the story of God making a new nation a new kingdom made up of his people, people who chose to love Him. I never have considered how much he was planning on given his people at the end of time until this study.

Dan 7:28  “This is the end of the account. As for me, Daniel, my thoughts greatly troubled me, and my countenance changed; but I kept the matter in my heart.”

Daniel is worn out by the experience, he says he kept the matter in his heart, probably meaning that he didn’t immediately broadcast what he had seen in the vision but thought much about it.

Daniel 2 : 31- 49 –Daniel Interprets Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream

By Chris White

Dan 2:31 “You, O king, were watching; and behold, a great image! This great image, whose splendor was excellent, stood before you; and its form was awesome.

Dan 2:32 This image’s head was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze,

Dan 2:33 its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay.”

So the first part of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream involved a statue which was made of 5 different materials. The head made of gold, the chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay.<!–more–>

Dan 2:31 “You, O king, were watching; and behold, a great image! This great image, whose splendor was excellent, stood before you; and its form was awesome. “

Stephen R. Miller says the following of the phrase “its form was awesome.”

“ In verse 31:The word (“awesome”) is from a root word meaning “to fear.” Nebuchadnezzar was frightened by the statue; this certainly is understandable, for the huge image would have stood like a dazzling colossus before the king.”

So we see that Nebuchadnezzar’s dream was of a giant statue. We are not told exactly how big the statue was in his dream, but the image Nebuchadnezzar built in the next chapter, (which he forced everyone to worship) may have been patterned after this one, and that structure was ninety feet tall.

Dan 2:34 You watched while a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces.

Dan 2:35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were crushed together, and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; the wind carried them away so that no trace of them was found. And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.

There are two things in this verse that are worth noting before we begin reading Daniel’s interpretation of this dream.

The first is that the stone that Nebuchadnezzar watched being cut out was without hands. We will see in verse 44 that this means that this rock is not of human origin, but rather it is from God and distinct from the other elements in this dream in that regard.

The second thing worth noting is that the rock strikes the statue on its feet, not its toes. I will argue later that the feet and toes are described as one cohesive unit, they are still a part of the last empire, that of the legs of iron, but that both the feet and toes together represent a latter part of that kingdom which I think is supported in part because of this verse. I will expand on this in a few moments.

Dan 2:35 says: And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.

This is the last verse before Daniel begins his interpretation of this dream. It basically describes the statue’s utter destruction as a result of the rock hitting its feet.

It is also of extreme significance as we will see that this rock began very small, and then became a mountain and filled the whole earth, it was not a mountain when it initially struck the statue. But over some amount of time, not discussed here, it grows to fill the whole earth.

Dan 2:36 “This is the dream. Now we will tell the interpretation of it before the king.

Dan 2:37 You, O king, are a king of kings. For the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, strength, and glory;

Dan 2:38 and wherever the children of men dwell, or the beasts of the field and the birds of the heaven, He has given them into your hand, and has made you ruler over them all—you are this head of gold.”

Dan 2:36 “This is the dream. Now we will tell the interpretation of it before the king.”

Daniel declares that he has accomplished phase one of Nebuchadnezzar‘s request, he told him what the dream was. He then declares his intention to begin phase two, that is telling the interpretation of the dream.

Oftentimes when there is a symbolic prophecy in the Bible, like in the book Revelation, there is an interpretation given of that symbolism in the Bible. In the book of Revelation an Angel would tell us the meaning of John’s vision about the woman riding the beast, for example. Also, later on in the book of Daniel we see Angels giving literal interpretations of Daniel’s symbolic visions.

We must make sure that our interpretations of these symbolic visions are consistent with what scripture tells us the interpretation of the vision is. It seems like a simple thing, but it is a sometimes overlooked hermeneutical principal.

Dan 2:37 You, O king, are a king of kings. For the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, strength, and glory;

Daniel boldly speaks of the sovereignty of God here, telling Nebuchadnezzar that his kingdom was really given to him by Daniel’s God. This was not a necessary part of the interpretation of the dream. Daniel takes a risk here in telling the most powerful man on earth that he was really only a servant of Yahweh.

Daniel may have seen this extraordinary circumstance as a perfect way to witness to the king. It is one of many instances in this particular story that Daniel makes sure to let everyone know that this is because of God, not Him. We will see later that this had the effect that Daniel intended because we see Nebuchadnezzar bowing down and offering sacrifices to Yahweh at the end of this chapter.

Dan 2:38 and wherever the children of men dwell, or the beasts of the field and the birds of the heaven, He has given them into your hand, and has made you ruler over them all—you are this head of gold.

The first part of this verse is defining the extent of the dominion God had given to Nebuchadnezzar, which is expressed as total, that is all of the known world and everything in it. This is important because I think it shows in part that the following empires will also have a similar dominion, such as that of Babylon; that is, in order for a kingdom to qualify to be one of these parts of this statue, it must be a world-ruling empire.

You are this head of gold.

Here we begin to see that the statue’s various materials represent kings or kingdoms. This is the only instance in this interpretation where Daniel refers to a person, that is to a king instead of a kingdom. For instance, in the very next verse it says:

Dan 2:39 But after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to yours; then another, a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth.

It becomes very clear as we progress in Daniel’s interpretation that kingdoms are meant here and not necessarily kings, though in some cases it may apply to use them synonymously like in the case of Nebuchadnezzar, and even then we can see in verse 39, which says, “But after you shall arise another kingdom.“ that Daniel intended to refer to Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom even when he says “you”.

Stephen Miller, in the New American Commentary, writes concerning this next kingdom in verse 39:

“2:39a Daniel disclosed that another “kingdom” would rise after the Babylonian Empire. History is plain that the next great power to appear on the world scene was the Medo-Persian Empire led by the dynamic Cyrus the Great. This empire is symbolized by the silver chest and arms of the great statue…Medo-Persian dominance continued for approximately 208 years (539–331 B.C.)”

The Medes and Persians ruled together as one empire. This is even alluded to in other places in Daniel.

“For example, in Dan 8:20 the two-horned ram (symbolizing one kingdom) represents “the kings of Media and Persia,” and in chap. 6 the author referred to the “laws of the Medes and Persians” (cf. vv. 8, 15), indicating that Darius ruled by the laws of the Medo-Persian Empire, not a separate Median kingdom.”

Miller, Stephen B. (1994-08-31). The New American Commentary Volume 18 – Daniel (p. 95). B&H Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Daniel was an old man when Babylon was conquered by Cyrus the Great. The night of its conquest is detailed in Chapter 5, with the feast of Belshazzar and the writing on the wall. Daniel’s gifts were noticed by the Medo-Persians as well, and he went on to serve them for the few years before his death.

Cyrus was also notable because it was him that allowed the exiled captive Jews to return to Israel.

There is almost no disagreement among conservative scholars that the Medo-Persian Empire is in view here.

A third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth.

This third kingdom of Bronze is that of Greece. Alexander the Great conquered the known world, including the Medo-Persian Empire.

This we know not just from secular history, but also because when the angel interprets a vision Daniel has in Chapter 8 of a goat defeating a ram with two horns, it says the following:

Dan 8:20 The ram which you saw, having the two horns—they are the kings of Media and Persia.

Dan 8:21 And the male goat is the kingdom of Greece. The large horn that is between its eyes is the first king.

So not only do we know this from history, we have confirmation of the Bible’s viewpoint from the very same book. Again there is almost no disagreement among conservative scholars about the interpretation of the third bronze section of this statue being Greece.

Dan 2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others.

Again we have near universal agreement among conservative scholars as to the identity of the legs of iron – The Roman Empire.

Miller says the following:

“The image’s legs of iron represent the empire that dominated the world after Greece—ancient Rome. Five terms are utilized in this verse (“breaks,” “smashes,” “breaks to pieces,” “crush,” “break”) to emphasize the tremendous power this fourth kingdom would exert. Rome ruled the nations with an iron hand and like a huge iron club shattered all who resisted its will. The Roman Empire dominated the world from the defeat of Carthage in 146 B.C. to the division of the East and West empires in A.D. 395, approximately five hundred years. The last Roman emperor ruled in the West until A.D. 476.”

Before going into the next part about the feet and toes where there are significant differences in belief among conservative scholars, I want to briefly explain the reason I keep saying “agreement among conservative scholars” and not simply “scholars” when referring to the interpretation of these kingdoms.

The reason is that those who believe that prophecy is impossible as a part of their world view cannot see any of this chapter as predictive prophecy and they do have a different interpretation of these kingdoms as a result. But I won’t be detailing their view here. If you would like to learn more about it, I would recommend the book I have been referencing that is Stephen Miller’s Daniel from the New American Commentary. He interacts with this view at length.

To make a long story short, since Rome was nothing more than an insignificant village at the time Daniel wrote this, even by their liberal dating, they obviously can’t have the legs of iron being Rome. So by some funny business, they squeeze Greece into this final empire instead of Rome.

But for those of us that can believe that God can see the past, present and future, we are free to stand in awe at the accuracy in which God foretells the future. So let’s move on to the really challenging section of this prophecy.

Dan 2:41 Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay.

Dan 2:42 And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile.

Dan 2:43 As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay.

This is where there tends to be some disagreement among even conservative scholars.

But before I get into that, let me talk about where everyone tends to agree. That is that these feet and toes are somehow or another a part of the Roman Empire. In other words, the feet and toes mixed with iron and clay, while different, are not a part of a new kingdom but still a part of the legs of iron of the Roman Empire, just a chronologically later part; the end of the Roman Empire, if you will. Everyone tends to agree on that, but with many variations.

Here are some of the main conservative views people have about the feet and toes:

• That the feet and toes represent the final period of the Roman Empire being divided, weak, trying to cleave its divided empire together but failing.
• The feet and toes represent the final kingdom of the Antichrist in the last days. There are many variations of both of these views, some of which we will talk about in depth as we progress.
• That the feet and toes represent a nephilim hybrid kingdom in the last days. We will talk about that in depth a little later as well.

I used to hold to the 2^nd view, that the feet and toes were representing an end times kingdom, and that there would be a need to revive the Roman Empire.

I still believe that there will be an end times kingdom of the Antichrist, but for reasons I will demonstrate here, I am now firmly convinced that the Antichrist’s kingdom is not in view in this chapter. Furthermore, I hold that the belief that Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 are talking of the same events could be one of the more dangerous views held by conservative scholars today, because this view could allow the Antichrist to come onto the world scene almost entirely unnoticed, and even embraced as Christ by some.

I will talk much more in depth about this as we continue our verse-by-verse study in Daniel, but for further reading I would recommend Charles Cooper’s four-part paper entitled Daniel 2 and Daniel 7: Equal or not Equal.

I would also agree with Miller, who holds the opposing view to me, that in addition to your view on Daniel 2 and 7, your view about the rock that destroys this statue is the key to any person’s interpretation of this passage, and I would ask you to withhold your judgment on this matter until we get to those verses.

For now, let’s continue this verse-by-verse study, and be very critical of everything I am about to say, because although I am convinced of this interpretation, you need to remember that this will be a minority viewpoint on this passage, and you should be wary anytime someone is teaching something in the Bible that is not widely held, especially in areas not related to prophecy, like normal doctrinal issues.

Dan 2:41 Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay.

A very important part of this is that the last kingdom at some point will be divided.

Since both views I think rightly presume that the feet and toes represent a chronologically later point of Rome, we can safely say that this is saying that Rome will be divided toward the end of its existence, whether you believe that its end was in the past or will be in the future.

Here we have a few problems for the revived Roman Empire (RRE) view.

The first is that you have an unambiguous fulfillment of this passage in the history of the fall of Rome. We know that Rome was divided into several parts, eventually settling into just two parts, that is the east and west empires. We will see that the other elements of the feet and toes prophecy fit like a glove to the events of that period as well.

And the second major problem here for the RRE view is that forcing this prophecy to the end times means that you have to hold the view that the Antichrist has a divided weak kingdom in the end times.

The descriptions of the Antichrist’s kingdom in the Bible do not give the impression that it will be weak or divided , but rather that he will have absolute power, and that those who do not worship him will be killed. This does not sound like a weak or divided kingdom.

I will now go into some more depth on the first point, that the divided and partly strong-partly weak kingdom describes perfectly the end of Rome in the ancient past.

If you look up the phrase “The Crisis of the Third Century,” you will learn of about a one hundred year or so time period in Roman History where they almost lost everything. It was the first time in Rome’s history that they started to show weakness. All the years of their dominance and absolute iron fisted – or should I say iron legged – rule was starting to slow down during this time.

In 285 Diocletian split the empire into four parts called the tetrarchy, but it didn’t last. It briefly was united again under Constantine, but it quickly split again after his death into three divisions. It was total chaos, everyone claiming to be emperor for a few years.

Eventually, when all the dust settled, there were only two divisions of Rome, that is the eastern half and western half, and that is how it would stay until Rome fizzled out of existence. Rome would never again rise to the prominence it once had after this point, and it will grow less and less powerful until it is a shadow of its former self, constantly sacked by invading barbarians, penniless and powerless.

The exact date of Rome’s fall varies because of the “death by a thousand cuts” nature of its decline, but most historians put its fall at about 480 AD. A mere 100 years after the division of east and west was solidified.

I’m trying to establish that the end of Rome is characterized by weakness and division, and as we noted before, the one thing that both sides of the argument about the feet and toes made of iron and clay agree on is that the passage is saying that the end of the Roman Empire will be characterized by weakness and division.

The only difference is that some say the end of the Roman Empire is in the past, and some say we need to revive a Roman Empire first and then watch its end be characterized by weakness and division.

The next verse, Dan 2:42, says: And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile.

In this verse it seems to suggest that only the toes were of this mixed clay and iron composition, but we know from verse 33, where it only refers to its feet and not the toes being of this composition, that the author is referring to the feet and toes as one unit. This is further demonstrated in verse 34 in which the statue is said to be struck on its feet only, whereas one would think that the toes would be mentioned here if there was an important distinction.

In other words, idiomatically the final empire consists of only two parts, the legs of iron being the first, and the feet and toes of iron and clay being the second. And the words “feet” and “toes” can be used independently and interchangeably to refer to the final stage of the final kingdom.

The kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile.

Again this is a terrific description of the last 300 or so years of the Roman Empire, there were times during this period, a period often called “the decline of the Roman Empire” in which Rome was partly strong in some ways, but very weak in others.

We have seen already to an extent, and will see again in the next verse, that it is grammatically necessary to see that the clay and iron are representative of the divisions of the empire, in this case, the east and the west empires. So in order for this interpretation to be a perfect match, we would need to see a clear description in history of one of these divisions being much weaker than the other.

The so called “final split” of the Roman Empire occurred at a time when it was becoming clear that the western empire was going to be a lot more dangerous place to live than the east. This is when Constantine moved the capital from Rome to Constantinople. Eventually Rome would be sacked by Alaric in 410 while Constantinople would not be sacked until the Middle Ages.

I will quote from a few historians about the weakness of the Western Empire compared to the Eastern.

“The East, always wealthier, was not so destitute, especially as Emperors like Constantine the Great and Constantius II had invested heavily in the eastern economy. As a result, the Eastern Empire could afford large numbers of professional soldiers and augment them with mercenaries, while the Western Roman Empire could not afford this to the same extent. Even in major defeats, the East could, certainly not without difficulties, buy off its enemies with a ransom.”

“The political, economic and military control of the Eastern Empire’s resources remained safe in Constantinople….. In contrast, the Western Empire was more fragmented. Its capital was transferred to Ravenna in 402 largely for defensive reasons.”

“The Western Empire’s resources were much limited, and the lack of available manpower forced the government to rely ever more on confederate barbarian troops operating under their own commanders, where the Western Empire would often have difficulties paying. In certain cases deals were struck with the leaders of barbaric mercenaries rewarding them with land, which led to the Empire’s decline as less land meant there would be even less taxes to support the military…..As the central power weakened, the State gradually lost control of its borders and provinces, as well as control over the Mediterranean Sea. “

I suppose it’s important to me to show that this stuff is mainstream history. The divided parts of this kingdom were noticeably different in strength. As I mentioned, the eastern empire would survive in some capacity for hundreds of years after the west had long disappeared.

Dan 2:43: As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay, they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay.

And now we come to a verse that we will spend some time discussing.

There is a lot of confusion about this verse, which I think is due to the English translation of the Aramaic. Remember this section of Daniel is written in Aramaic and not Hebrew.

It should first be noted that other translations such as the ESV render the underlying Aramaic phrase this way:

“As you saw the iron mixed with soft clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay. (ESV)”

So instead of mingle with the seed of men they mix with one another in marriage.

So the question is: Is the ESV capturing the intent of the Aramaic here?

Let’s first take this word translated as “mingle”:

It is the Aramaic word “Arab” (ar-av) which corresponds to the Hebrew “Arab”. In other words, this word, if you look it up, will be in Aramaic, and its only use is right here in Daniel, because Aramaic is very rare. However, most Aramaic words correspond directly to Ancient Hebrew words, and that is the case here. In fact, they are even pronounced the same.

The Hebrew word “Arab” means: to pledge, exchange, mortgage, engage, occupy, undertake for, give pledges, be or become surety, take on pledge, give in pledge.

For example in Genesis 43:9, when Judah was begging his father to let him take Benjamin to Egypt as per Joseph’s request, he says that he will become surety for Benjamin. The word “surety” is where we get the word “mingle”.

Gen 43:9 I myself will be surety for him; from my hand you shall require him. If I do not bring him back to you and set him before you, then let me bear the blame forever.

Another example of its use is in 2 Kings 18:23 where the word “pledge” is the word translated “mingle” in our passage

2Ki 18:23 Now therefore, I urge you, give a pledge to my master the king of Assyria, and I will give you two thousand horses—if you are able on your part to put riders on them!

But the same word for “mingle” also can mean “to mix together”. And in fact, of the two times it is used that way in the Bible, it is speaking of the intermarriage of Jewish and pagan tribes.

Ezr 9:2 For they have taken of their daughters for themselves, and for their sons: so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the people of those lands: yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been chief in this trespass.

Here we have a very similar phrase to the one in our verse. I think this shows some precedent that the translators of the KJV believed that mingling seed was referring to intermarriage with two groups.

Psa 106:35 But they mingled with the Gentiles And learned their works

So I think you can see that the ESV here has a pretty decent rendering of this phrase when it says: they will mix with one another in marriage.

But even if that is true, we still have to determine who they are, and who they are trying to intermarry with, and perhaps more importantly, what is it referring to.

So we need to find out who they are in this verse. And I will suggest the simple method of sentence structure and basic grammar to find out who they are.

If we look just before this in verse 41, we see that Daniel says that the feet and toes of clay and iron are representing a divided kingdom. The next three verses repeatedly refer to these two divisions of the kingdom as iron and clay.

Grammatically there is no other possible plural subject other than the separate, divided parts of the kingdom represented by the iron and clay. This is confirmed in verse 44, when it says “in the days of these kings,” making it clear that the plural subject that was in view in verse 43 must be referring to the kings of the divided kingdom in verse 41.

So what this verse is saying is that the divided parts of the empire will pledge their offspring to one another in an attempt to become strong again, but it will not work.

Now it would be one thing if I had to go looking for some obscure fulfillment of this in Roman history, but the strength of this interpretation is the unambiguous fulfillment of it in the history of Rome, which I think you will see gives the interpretations a great deal more credibility.

Now in order for this to be true, we can’t just go picking any arranged marriages of emperors in Ancient Rome. Almost every senator, general, prefect or any other person with imperial ambitions had arranged marriages to secure their legitimacy to the throne. I’m only slightly exaggerating when I say that you can’t read a single page in the entire history of Rome without reading about an arranged political marriage.

But we are looking for a very specific type of political marriage here. It has to be toward the very end of Rome’s existence because it is regarding the feet and toes, it has to be between the eastern and western empires, the two kings of the divided kingdom need to pledge their offspring to one another, and for the specific purpose of trying to unify Rome and keep it from demise. This should narrow it down quite a bit.

There are two instances where this exact thing happened at the end of the Roman Empire.

The first is in 467, only about 9 years before the last Roman emperor. This is a time when the Vandals were posing a major threat to Rome and while Leo was reigning strongly in the east. There had not been an emperor in the west for a few years because a guy named Ricimer, who had been ruling behind the scenes by manipulating puppet emperors for many years, had not appointed another puppet emperor and was hoping no one would care or that people would just accept him as the default emperor.

Well this became a problem in the eastern empire because of the threat of the Vandals and the imminent war that they were going to have to have with them.

So Leo decided to choose an emperor of the west for the west. He chose a guy named Anthemius and sent him to the west with a big army so that Ricimer would have to get with the new program.

Here is the marriage connection: The emperor of the east, Leo, gave his daughter, Leontia, to Anthemius’ son, Marcian, to legitimize the reign of his new appointee to the west, essentially saying, “Ok, east and west, we are all one big happy family now. So let’s go fight the Vandals or we are all in big trouble.”

In addition, Anthemius also gave his only daughter, Alypia, to Ricimer, which also made Anthemius, who was a Greek-speaking foreigner to the west, acceptable to the Latin-speaking Romans, of which Ricimer had become kind of a ring leader.

This plan actually might have worked, too, but the battle with the Vandals went very badly, and Anthemius would soon be killed, and they would all be right back at the place that they started.

Which brings us to the second attempt of cleaving the east and the west together with marriages. This time it occurs in 474, just two years before the last Roman Emperor, with Julious Nepos. There are actually a lot of people that argue that Nepos was the last Roman Emperor, choosing not to count the child Romulus Augustulus who “ruled” for about a year after Nepos was exiled.

This time Leo married off his niece to Nepos. The surname Nepos actually means nephew. Because he took the surname nephew as his title, referring to his now-nephew status to Leo in the east, it should show us the importance of that marriage in the attempt to unify the east and the west. But it was too late for Rome. There were too many problems. And just like this verse in Daniel says, these two divisions of the final kingdom do not cleave together and the fall of the western Roman Empire is put somewhere around this time at 476-480.

but they will not adhere to one another.

I want to briefly speak about the nephilim interpretation of this verse and point out that whatever this is, it will not adhere or cleave together. That is to say, it won’t work. There are many that say this verse is proof of a future nephilim hybrid situation in the end times. But even if you were to assume that the word they is speaking of angels, you would have to conclude that it doesn’t work – there would be no hybrids made in this interpretation.

Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.

Dan 2:45 Inasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold—the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation is sure.”

Ok so here we are at the most crucial part, the identification of this stone. Let’s briefly recall what happened with this stone in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in verses 34-35:

Dan 2:34 You watched while a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces.

Dan 2:35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold were crushed together, and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; the wind carried them away so that no trace of them was found. And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.

So this stone strikes the statue on the feet, and it eventually grows to fill the whole earth.

Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.

a kingdom

This stone is a kingdom, a kingdom that God will institute during the Roman Empire that will eventually grow to encompass the entire world. This is agreed upon by many scholars, even Miller who holds to a revived Roman Empire view.

There are some that would say that this has to be speaking of Jesus because of the verse that says he is a cornerstone, but that would offend the explicit teaching in this verse that this rock is a kingdom in the same way that the others were a kingdom.

This is known all throughout the Bible as the “Kingdom of God.” I will show you a few verses to demonstrate two points:

• That Jesus Christ begins the Kingdom of God in his day (during the Roman Empire).
• That the Kingdom of God is supposed to start small and then grow large. (Typified by starting with the apostles and spreading to all those who will ever be saved.)

1.) That Jesus Christ begins the Kingdom of God in his day:

Mar 1:15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”

Mat 12:28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you.

Luk 17:20 Now at one point the Pharisees asked Jesus when the kingdom of God was coming, so he answered, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed,

Luk 17:21 nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ For indeed, the kingdom of God is in your midst.”

It should be here noted that there seems to be a present and future sense of the kingdom of God, in the sense that the ultimate fulfillment of the kingdom of God is not here or in this world but rather in eternity. But it I believe can be shown with certainty that Jesus considered the Kingdom of God, to have been established with Him on earth during his teaching ministry.

2.) That the Kingdom of God is supposed to start small and then grow large.

Mat 13:31 Another parable He put forth to them, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field,

Mat 13:32 which indeed is the least of all the seeds; but when it is grown it is greater than the herbs and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and nest in its branches.”

Mat 13:33 Another parable He spoke to them: “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal till it was all leavened.”

These two parables are describing the “small and then growing large” aspect of the Kingdom of God.

So this is in a sense a prophecy for all ancient peoples as to a general time the Messiah would come; that is, the Kingdom of God would be established sometime during the Roman Empire. This may be one reason that messianic expectations were so high in Jesus’ day.

shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people;

Here it contrasts God’s kingdom with the usual fate of the kingdoms of man. It won’t have a successor, nor an end, it won’t be divided among generals or anyone else.

it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.

This is one verse that suggests that all these kingdoms, like Babylon and Greece, would either be contemporaneous, which we know was not the case, or that they are all considered to be part of one spirit, or one whole in some sense.

I would suggest that this verse is expressing the different nature of God’s Kingdom to man’s, and it includes all the previous kingdoms here to further drive home that point. That is, when God’s Kingdom is fully and eternally established, there will be no more manifestations of man’s kingdoms.

Dan 2:45 Inasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold— the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation is sure.”

In verse 45 I want to focus in on the latter half of this verse.

Daniel again makes sure that Nebuchadnezzar, who is probably showing signs of his utter amazement at this point, knows that it was Yahweh who deserves the glory for this feat.

He also adds that the dream and interpretation are certain and sure. This is what will happen, and that God wants Nebuchadnezzar to know it.

Dan 2:46 Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell on his face, prostrate before Daniel, and commanded that they should present an offering and incense to him.

Dan 2:47 The king answered Daniel, and said, “Truly your God is the God of gods, the Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, since you could reveal this secret.”

It appears from verse 46 that the offerings were made to Daniel himself as if he were a god. But then in verse 47, it seems to suggest that Nebuchadnezzar was giving this worship to Daniel’s God, which makes more sense as it seems unlikely given the great pains that Daniel went through to make sure that it was not him but God, that Daniel would accept such a sacrifice.

While this was probably the equivalent of planting a seed in Nebuchadnezzar’s heart that Yahweh was God of all and worthy of submission, his worship of Yahweh here is not to be looked at as his conversion, as we will see in the next chapter that this is a short lived piety.

Dan 2:48 Then the king promoted Daniel and gave him many great gifts; and he made him ruler over the whole province of Babylon, and chief administrator over all the wise men of Babylon.

Dan 2:49 Also Daniel petitioned the king, and he set Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego over the affairs of the province of Babylon; but Daniel sat in the gate of the king.

Miller says:

2:48 “A high position” (lit., “made great”) was awarded to Daniel, namely, that he would be the “ruler over the entire province of Babylon” and “in charge of all its wise men” (v. 48). Thus Daniel’s high position was twofold: he administrated the key province in the empire, the one that included the capital city, Babylon, and he was appointed as the chief counselor to the king with authority over the other wise men.103

David Guzik summarized these verses this way:

Daniel not only had his life spared, but he was promoted to high office – and he made sure his friends were also promoted. It was fitting that Daniel’s friends got to share in his advancement, because they accomplished much of the victory through their prayers.

Download mp3 here

Alan’s Website

The word “parousia” (coming) is only used 24 times in the New Testament; The definition includes and encompasses all the things that Christ will do, starting with the rapture–His visible return, the raising of the dead, the last judgment, and the setting up of the kingdom after Armageddon; The rapture will be the first thing to happen at His coming (“parousia”), but there are not multiple “parousias”; There is only one word that is used to describe all of those tasks; In Greek literature, the word was used to describe a visit from a king to the area that the king ruled over; It was used to refer to his arrival, and the entirety of his visit… the “parousia” or “coming” of the king could last a long time; Matthew 13:30; Matthew 13:39-40; Matthew 24:4-8; He says that in the days leading up to His “parousia”, there are going to be signposts, but He warns us that these should not be confused with the End of the Age, or the Wrath of God; These signs are only the beginnings of sorrows–the word there is “birth pangs” in some translations

in 2 Thessalonians 2, Paul talks about this enigmatic “restrainer”; He talks to the Thessalonians like it’s old news; Paul may have gotten his understanding of the identity and purpose for the restrainer from Matthew 24; 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 5-8; The pretribulational view teaches that the restrainer is the Holy Spirit, and that He will be removed with the church at the rapture; There is a scriptural problem here, though… the logic of the restrainer being the Holy Spirit and being removed at the rapture is an impossibility; The scriptural order is: 1) the restrainer is taken out of the way, 2) the Antichrist is revealed, 3) the church is raptured; The answer to the question of who the restrainer is lies in the book of Daniel, in a parallel verse to Matthew 24:15-22; Daniel 12:1; Zechariah 13; It actually appears that Michael stops restraining at the abomination of desolation; Daniel 7:25; Revelation 12:7-10, 12-14; Jude 1:9

Download Podcast

Show Notes:

A FRESH LOOK AT EZEKIEL 38 AND 39
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/17/17-3/17-3-pp157-169_JETS.pdf

Notice the Chronological pattern of these prophetic books they all end just as The Revelation does with the pattern of:

Day of the Lord DOTL,1000 years, Gog Magog, and the Eternal Kingdom.

I believe that Ezekiel also ends this way too, but the last 9 chapters (about the 1000 years) were perhaps intended to be circulated separately, which may make sense of Josephus’ idea that Ezekiel left behind “two books” (Ant. 10.5, 1) Either way its clear that Eze 37-39 ends just as the other books do, with this same chronology.

Premillennial Judgment Passages (DOTL) (all references are give or take)

Rev: 6:12 – 19:21
Zeph 1-2:5
Eze 37:1-11
Zec: 14: 1-5

1000 Year Period

Rev 20:1-6
Zeph 2:6-15
Joel 2:21-32
Isa: 65:17-25, 66:10-14
Eze 37: 12-28
Zec 14: 6-11

Gog Magog

Rev 20:7-9
Zeph 3:1-11
Joel 3:1-16
Isa 66:15-18
Eze 38-39:20
Zec 12:1-9, 14:12-15

Eternal Kingdom

Zeph 3:12-20
Joel 3:17 -21
Isa 66:19-24
Rev 21:1-22:5
Eze 39:21-29
Zec 12:10-14, 14: 16-21

I am sure that I may be off on some of the above, but I think its pretty close.
Also I would recommend this paper which although does not make any of the above claims it did make me see as never before the importance of the Ezekiel 40-48 in relation to Zechariah:
ZECHARIAH IN RELATION TO. EZEKIEL 40-48 by CAMERON MAkay
http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/eq/1968-4_197.pdf.