Samuel Whitefield – Understanding the Fourth Kingdom of Daniel 2 and 7 – Part 1

PDF: Samuel Whitefield – The Fourth Kingdom of Daniel 2 and 7 – Part 1

THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE FOUR KINGDOMS
The basic consensus of this introduction of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 is agreed upon, being the standard understanding of these two chapters by most interpretations. It is also noted, however, that while a pagan king Nebuchadnezzar saw a statue which represented the outward glory of these four kingdoms, Daniel, by faith, saw the spiritual reality of them, that is, a representation of the spiritual power behind them.
1. Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 both record very clear prophecies of four kingdoms. Both prophecies begin with a dream, one by Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2:1) and another by Daniel (Daniel 7:1). Both dreams highlight four kingdoms.
2. In both visions, the overwhelming amount of emphasis is on the fourth kingdom and this is why it is very important that we understand what the Bible tells us about this kingdom. We can look at the unique descriptions of this fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 and 7 to see how both chapters describe the same kingdom and what the unique characteristics of this kingdom are. Daniel 7 builds on the dream of Daniel 2 giving us more specific information and insight into what Nebuchadnezzar saw related to the fourth kingdom.
THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOURTH KINGDOM
1. The kingdom is described as terrible and crushing all others. It’s described as devouring, breaking, and trampling. Its strength is compared to iron, the strongest, hardest, most unyielding material Daniel could imagine. This is the first description of the kingdom and therefore is its most dominant characteristic. Nothing much to be disagreed with here. This is, indeed, what the fourth Kingdom is represented as.
  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. (Daniel 2:40 NKJV)
  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. (Daniel 7:7 NKJV)
  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; (Daniel 7:19 NKJV)
  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. (Daniel 7:23 NKJV)
2. Both Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 highlight the fact that the final kingdom is, at least initially, ruled by ten kings. This is an assertion not supported by the text, as it will be demonstrated through the development [1 – Though iron specifically indicates the cruelty of this kingdom, there is also divine poetry at work because this kingdom is an imposter of the Messianic King who rules with a rod of iron. While a side issue, this does not seem to be a valid parallel. While both materials are iron, iron is used for many things, including an ‘iron pan’ in Ezekiel 4:3. It’s material characteristics are all that are in view here.]
  1. Daniel 2:41 tells us that the kingdom is divided meaning it will not begin as a kingdom led by one single ruler, but rather as a kingdom with many divisions. This is a false rendering of ‘divided’, to portray it as such. The commentator is using the ‘divided’ of the iron vs clay to imply the ‘divided’ of the toes, which is something completely added to the text which the text itself does not say. The distinction given is strictly in the division of the composition of the kingdom, implying, presumably, the lack of the Hellenization force of the Greeks in the fourth Kingdom, not in anyway speaking of teh toes. Daniel emphasizes this point by referring to the toes of the statue. It is important to realize that interpreting the ‘ten-toes’ as ten rulers is not given by Daniel, but is popular speculation by modern interpreters. While there may be some correlation, it is not given textually. But, regardless, the ‘divided’ cannot be seen to be construed whatsoever as referring to the toes, but specifically refers to the composition of the whole. This is clear. This reveals that the kingdom will be divided ten ways or, in other words, be led by ten kings. This conclusion, based upon the above, is merely conjecture and speculation. Our general disagreement is stated, even though the premise will be developed later. Yet, as stated, Daniel 2 in no way necessitates a ten-king arrangement nor of a ten-way kingdom. Just as the feet are the foundation of the body, so too these ten kings will form the initial foundation of the fourth kingdom. This conclusion is clearly non-sense. The statue started at the top, with the head, Nebuchadnezzar. What’s at the bottom comes last, not first.
    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. (Daniel 2:41 NKJV)
  2. Daniel 7 elaborates on the dream of Daniel 2 confirming that the fourth kingdom emerges with ten kings. There are, indeed, ten horns on the fourth beast. Whether the toes correspond to these is, ultimately, irrelevant, and adds nothing to the discussion.
    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. (Daniel 7:7 NKJV)
    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 7:20 NKJV)
    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. (Daniel 7:24 NKJV)
  3. The language of Daniel 7:24, can cause us to ask the question of whether this kingdom exists for some time before the ten kings emerge. However, this verse needs to be considered in light of the rest of Daniel 2 and 7. While Daniel does tell us that the “little horn” will emerge in a process, every description of the fourth kingdom in Daniel and Revelation include the ten kings (Daniel 2:41; 7:7, 20, 24; Revelation 12:3; 13:1; 17:7, 12). None of these descriptions indicate the ten kings develop after the fourth kingdom has emerged. In other words, there could be a process, kingdom, or empire that leads to the establishment of the fourth kingdom, but what’s biblically recognized as the fourth kingdom must have those ten kings. This is false. It may be commonly accepted, but it is not required by the text. It is ‘recognized’ by people who have a bent towards this interpretation, and nothing else. There are, indeed, ten kings, but no requirement from Daniel 2 or 7, or Revelation 12, 13, or 17 necessitates a concurrent rule.
  4. We have to conclude from the text that, until there is a kingdom led by ten kings, what Daniel and John saw as the fourth kingdom has not yet appeared. Daniel 7:24 could be hinting that a large empire, probably similar to the Seleucid one (Daniel 8:23), is formed all across the Middle East to answer some sort of crisis, and that it is divided among ten kings. It’s hard to determine the exact way this kingdom develops, but it’s clear from every other verse that you have to have these ten kings to have what Daniel saw as the fourth kingdom. Again, this argument is convenient for their argument, but lacks textual basis. The ‘ten horns’ of Revelation 17:12 are not to be taken as the same ten horns, and the ‘eight kings’ of Revelation 17:10-11 do not need be concurrent either. While the 10-king arrangment the commentator mentions may not have occurred, they can be seen to be fulfilled historically in the Caesars of Rome.
3. Though the kingdom has ten kings, both Daniel 2 and 7 tell us that this ten king confederation will ultimately not last.
  1. Daniel 2 tells us that the kingdom will be partly strong and partly fragile because, just as clay and iron do not mix, there will be mixture in the kingdom that will ultimately keep the ten kings from staying together and united. They do stay united until the rock smashes them. They are cohesive enough to form a terrible beats in Daniel 7, so, ultimately, the claim that their mixture keeps them from ‘staying together and united’ is false. They do, and that is why the rock of Daniel 2:35,44 crushes them. Perhaps, suffice to say, had they not been mixed, things could have been much worse.
    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. 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. (Daniel 2:42-43 NKJV)
    1. Daniel tells us the kings will “mingle their seed” but not adhere to each other. This is a common reference to intermarriage between royal families. Daniel appears to hint that the kings will try to maintain the unity of their confederation through marriage but even that will not hold it together. Again, too much is read into the idea of ‘confederation’. There is an interpretative agenda here that becomes apparent. They do co-exist until the breaking, but do not ‘mix’.
    2. The fragility of iron and clay could also indicate other elements of mixture, but the fact that it exists on the part of the statues that represents the ten kings highlights the fact that it is highlighting the division that erupts between the kings. It is important to remember that the majority of the statue that represents the fourth kingdom is solid iron because this is the fourth kingdom’s most dominant description. The feet and toes were iron and clay, not just the ‘ten toes’.
  2. Daniel 7 expands on what Daniel 2 introduces about the ten king confederation and their disunity. In Daniel 7 we find out that the division between the ten kings leads to three of them being deposed leaving only seven united kings. These three kings are subdued by an individual who is initially referred to as a “little horn.” Often taken as the ‘antichrist’, this little horn is Domitian, the 11th emperor of Rome. Three emperors fell in one year, making way for Vespasian. After him ruled his son, Titus. And Domitian, the beast of Revelation 13, was also his son.
    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. (Daniel 7:8 NKJV)
    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 7:20 NKJV)
4. The kingdom is described as “completely different” from any of the others that Daniel saw indicating that this fourth kingdom does not bear any semblance to the ancient kingdoms Daniel was familiar with [Where this conclusion is derived from is not stated, but suffice to say, this is certainly an addition] nor with the kingdoms that are represented in the previous three kingdoms. It is critical that we do not minimize this part of the description of the kingdom. It could be said that it is ‘critical’ that we do not minimize any part of the prophecy. Each part is essential. When dealing with Scripture, statements like this are tautology.
  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. (Daniel 2:40 NKJV)
  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. (Daniel 7:7 NKJV)
  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; (Daniel 7:19 NKJV)
  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. (Daniel 7:23 NKJV)
  1. Both Daniel and the interpreting angel describe this kingdom as completely different. This phrase is used three times in Daniel 7. From both Daniel’s perspective and heaven’s perspective this is completely different from anything else before it.
  2. The fact that the “different” nature of the kingdom is so emphasized indicates that this is one specific kingdom at one specific point in time. In other words, there cannot be multiple or “partial” fulfillments of this kingdom because the defining characteristic of this kingdom is that it is completely different from any other kingdom at any other point in history. While the general conclusion may be agreed upon, the development of it leaves some to be desired. While there is one specific kingdom in view, the ‘different’ in the text is ‘different from all the other kingdoms’ and ‘different from all the beasts that were before it’. The ‘different’ is in reference to the first three kingdoms, not in the way the commentator describes.
  3. In Daniel 2, Daniel describes the kingdom as one that breaks in pieces and crushes all the rest, while in Daniel 7 it say it will “devour the whole earth, trample it, and break it into pieces.” (Daniel 7:23) In other words, there has never been a kingdom like this on the earth and will never be another kingdom like it. Nothing can compare to it. This is complete nonsense, and the effort of trying to prove one’s point when the text doesn’t. While there are seeds of truth, especially in that the fourth beast will be destroyed immediately while the first three are allowed to remain for a ‘season and a time’, but stripped of their authority, the text says nothing of the kind with regards to this. This is a case of directing the student into a prescribed interpretation, and not simply letting the text speak for itself. While some of this can be explained due to the specific reading of texts prior and elsewhere, the body of work of it constitutes a non-necessary conclusion. In conglomeration of these points however, a general case that is not directly established on the text is construed, and, and then defended in empty statements about the verse.
  4. It has “huge” iron teeth. It is “dreadful,” “terrible,” and “exceedingly strong.” Its strength is beyond anything Daniel can imagine and far beyond anything belonging to any other kingdom. Daniel uses exaggerated language to describe every characteristic of the beast. This language puts this beast in another class from every ancient empire – something very significant given that Daniel experienced the might of both Babylon and Persia. The points already made are sufficient to disagree. The commentator has an end-of-the-age antichrist kingdom in mind, and the details can be portrayed as nothing else. But, this is not scholarship.
  5. There is poetry between this horrific kingdom and the everlasting kingdom of Daniel 7:14. Just as God’s kingdom will never be challenged or destroyed, so to the wickedness of this kingdom will never be equaled. On some level, this is true, although it is seen to be historically fulfilled in Rome. Even in the same way the Great Tribulation is seen already past in 70 AD, so too, the fourth beast is already destroyed in fire. Rome will never be redone.
5. In Daniel 7, the first three beasts are natural beasts in a distorted form. However the fourth beast is completely unnatural.
  The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings… “And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear. It was raised up on one side… “After this I looked, and there was another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird… 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 different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. (Daniel 7:4-7 NKJV)
  1. The first three beasts resembled natural beasts because, though these kingdoms were influenced by wickedness, they were “natural” kingdoms. In contrast, the fourth kingdom bears no resemblance to any natural beast. In fact, it is completely unnatural with features like “huge iron teeth” (Daniel 7:7) and “bronze nails.” (Daniel 7:19). This enforces the fact that this beast is unlike any natural beast or any other beast kingdom. It is completely unnatural and does not resemble anything normal. It may ‘suggest’ a possibility, but it in no way ‘enforces’ anything.
  2. All other dark empires have within them the residue of natural men. However this kingdom is notable by the absence of anything natural or organic. That is specifically mentioned, that is. The kingdom is hard as iron because it is completely devoid of any semblance of the imprint of God on creation. False. The same argument could be said of bronze, silver, or gold. It’s origin and life is not human. That’s a given. They’re all demonic, which is why Daniel saw beasts. It is of another class or kind. Something completely foreign has taken the stage of history. True, the same with much of ‘Western Civilization’.
6. Daniel 7 adds a specific detail to the fourth kingdom that Daniel 2 does not include. Within this kingdom, there is one specific individual that will emerge. Though he begins as a “little horn” something will happen to him that will completely alter who he is and make him the ultimate leader and complete personification of this fourth kingdom. That’s certainly one interpretation–one of many, which our larger body of study seems to disfavor.
  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. (Daniel 7:8 NKJV) Seen as Domitian.
  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 7:11 NKJV)
  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 7:20 NKJV)
  I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them, (Daniel 7:21 NKJV) Domitian persecuted the church.
  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. 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. But the court shall be seated, And they shall take away his dominion, To consume and destroy it forever. (Daniel 7:24-26 NKJV) Domitian indeed changed the calendars and overturned much of the Roman legal system during his reign, and instituted emperor worship. Had not God Himself passed judgment, only heaven knows what continuing evil he may have propagated.
  1. The “pompous and arrogant” words of the beast are very significant, especially since every evil king is arrogant, pompous, and narcissistic. These characteristics are not unusual and many rulers have claimed divinity and even required worship. This means that this beast will speak pompous and arrogant words and challenge the authority of God in a way that no one in history has done. There is something unique about his “words” and the way he challenges YHWH. This is not mere arrogance. It is an ultimate exaltation of self and an ultimate challenge to YHWH. Domitian did.
  2. He even tries to “change the times and laws” (Daniel 7:25) a clear challenge to the sovereignty of YHWH’s who is referred to in Daniel 2:21 as the One who alone can change the times and seasons. As said, he changed the Roman calendar and laws.
  3. He will actually have authority to crush and trample for a season, but when it ends he will be destroyed suddenly and forever given to the burning flame. He is so unique that his destruction and judgment is unique even when compared to other wicked rulers (Daniel 7:11-12). Historical.
  4. It is very important to note that this “horn” is different from even the other ten kings related to this kingdom. In other words, though he arises from the same kingdom as the ten kings, he is referred to as being completely different from even them. He is not just the most prominent king among the ten; he is completely different in essence from them. He is “greater than all his fellows” (Daniel 7:20). Domitian was Vespasian’s son, as was Titus. He was also seen as Nero back from the dead, and called a ‘Beast’ by his contemporaries, not just Christians. Thus, he was the beast that was, is not (in John’s day), and will come back out of the pit. Nero died of a head-wound (self-inflicted sword to the neck).
  5. This is significant language. The beast kingdom is already completely different, but the angel goes further and warns that this ruler himself is very different even from the other ten kings ruling in the kingdom. The primary point is that it is this completely different ruler who will cause the fourth kingdom to be completely different from every other kingdom. Again, describes Domitian.
  6. He is so completely different from them, that his rule on the earth justifies God personally seating the heavenly court for judgment to destroy his rule and reign forever. Too much is made of this. God does have court, but He regularly holds court, because He is a king, and He passes judgments. This is what kings do. There are appropriate times and seasons for these things, as there are in any sane, and reasonable kingdom. He is so radically different from every other king, that God judges him by setting His divine King in place, a clear sign that this horn, more than any other ruler in history, has challenged the rule of God’s divine King. The pattern here is wrongly described. God the Father does indeed give the Son a Kingdom here at this point, but, contrary to this teaching, this was at His ascension to the Father, Daniel 7:13. He will seek to rule the nations in the place of God’s chosen King and so he will be destroyed and the dominion he desperately sought was given to God’s chosen King. The connections are based upon the commenator’s chosen end-point, and, while may fit in that general theme, obviously do not fit in ours. But, be that as it may, the text itself is our focus. The level and scope that is read into this is merely the reading into this of the contemporary, and modern concept and construction of the antichrist, a figure that simply does not exist in scripture, in our opinion, at least not in the way of this. The various passages, as we interpret, apply to various individuals throughout history, and not to one, end-time ‘super-villian’.
    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. As for the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time. 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. 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. (Daniel 7:11-14 NKJV)
7. The magnitude of the darkness of this kingdom causes Daniel such grief and pain that the angel had to assure Daniel of the ultimate victory of God over this kingdom before he interpreted the vision to Daniel and gave him more details about what he saw. Perhaps, but that doesn’t preclude Rome.
  I, Daniel, was grieved in my spirit within my body, and the visions of my head troubled me. 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: Those great beasts, which are four, are four kings which arise out of the earth. But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.’ (Daniel 7:15- 18 NKJV)
  ‘But the court shall be seated, And they shall take away his dominion, To consume and destroy it forever. 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.’ 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 7:26-28 NKJV)
8. We must note that some commentators have suggested perhaps that the iron legs and the iron and clay mixture in the feet actually indicate that this is a “two-stage” kingdom that is divided and appears twice on the stage of history. There are several reasons why this interpretation is problematic. Not to mention completely contradicted by Daniel 7:17, “These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.” So long as Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 are taken in parallel, there is no basis to contradict the clear reading of this verse, which in no unclear terms limits the number of beasts to exactly four.
  1. Daniel interprets the fourth kingdom as one single kingdom in Daniel 2:40 with no indication of stages or multiple iterations. In Daniel 7 the angel also interprets it as a single kingdom again with no indication of any stages or divisions.
  2. It is important to see that the legs make up the majority of the fourth kingdom and that they are hard as iron, which confirms the description in Daniel 7 of the kingdom. If the legs represent a separate kingdom from the feet, it would mean that the final kingdom is predominantly mixed and weak and this does not match the emphasis of Daniel 7. The reason that clay is only mixed in near the toes is simply because the clay is only there to represent the instability between the 10 kings. False. It’s the feet and the toes.
  3. Two different body parts were also highlighted in the description of the second (chest and arms) and third (belly and thighs) kingdom, but we know from Daniel’s interpretation and from history that in each case it refers to a single kingdom.
  4. To try to divide the kingdom into an iron kingdom and then an iron and clay kingdom means that the final kingdom is weaker than the kingdom that comes before it. That is the opposite of every other description of this kingdom that emphasizes the fact that the final antichrist kingdom is by far the greatest evil kingdom in history.
9. To fully understand the nature of the kingdom that Daniel saw, we have to understand the historical context in which the prophecy is given. The prophecy of Daniel 2 occurs soon after the first Babylonian invasion of Jerusalem while the prophecy of Daniel 7 occurs after the final desolation of Jerusalem in 586 BC.
  1. Daniel was living in a generation that endured a siege of Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians that was so horrific that people actually ate their own children to survive. The Babylonians completely destroyed the Jewish state and the Jewish temple, imprisoning and deporting the majority of the population.
  2. Daniel was writing [Technically, Daniel is not writing primiarly ‘to’ anyone, but is recording visions. Certainly the hope is to edify, exhort, and encourage, and the book was kept by the Jews, the purpose was revelatory and scribal.] to a nation that was enslaved, whose kingdom, capital, and temple had been totally destroyed with the message that a far worse oppressor was coming. Though Daniel was deeply grieved in his soul over the condition of Israel in his generation, which is clear in Daniel 9, he has a very unique response to what he sees. There is deep pain and grief at what he sees, and Daniel uses exaggerated language because he is seeing something he cannot describe.
  3. The fact that Daniel was intimately familiar with the Babylonian invasion must be considered when we try to understand exactly what Daniel was seeing when he saw this fourth kingdom – a kingdom far, far more terrible than the Babylonian army that crushed Judah. First of all, Rome was. Second of all, the conjecture in this claim, and the purpose of making such a statement, are simply to attempt to disqualify and make something of the text that frankly just isn’t there. It’s not honest, and it’s not integrity. The commentator has an agenda to prove with his statements, and that’s that.
  4. The grief that Daniel experiences in all of his visions related to the end-times is part of the confirmation of the language Daniel uses. The character of the fourth kingdom must be far darker than Babylon, far stronger than Babylon, and the devastation it causes, not only in Israel but also in the earth, must be far beyond what Babylon did. Rome.
THE TIMING OF THE FOURTH KINGDOM
1. Daniel tells Nebuchadnezzar that the point of the dream is what will happen in the “latter days” or the end of this age.
  But there is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, and He has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will be in the latter days. Your dream, and the visions of your head upon your bed, were these: (Daniel 2:28 NKJV)
2. Daniel 2 gives specific information about how this kingdom comes to an end that confirms the timing of when this kingdom must emerge on the earth.
  1. First the dream tells us that the stone cut without hands will specifically strike the feet of the statue. This is a key timing indicator. Messiah must physically strike the fourth kingdom and destroy its kings. Daniel also tells us that all the pagan empires in the dream are crushed in the striking of the fourth kingdom. Daniel 2:35, where the NIV omits the word ‘together’. This is substantial proof that these are fulfilled. Contrary to the commentator’s following remarks, this does not indicate merely the ‘root’ of evil that animated and influenced them, as that would be the beasts of Daniel 7, but this indicates that the outward glory and majesty of them is in some way still in existence. Since we see that Babylon, Media-Persia, and Ancient Greece are all completely ‘broken small’ and ‘scattered by the wind’, and that no place is found for them, we can positively conclude, on the basis of Scripture, that whatever broke them, also broke Fourth Kingdom, Rome. This thing that broke them is the Kingdom, and that positively identifies the first coming of Christ. This indicates us that within the fourth kingdom lies the root of evil that has animated and influenced all the other powers. This is why Messiah specifically strikes the feet. It is the area of the fourth kingdom that symbolizes the kings, and ultimate the “little horn” who leads this kingdom. Ultimately, if you must insist upon the ‘ten toes are ten kings’ approach, this actually further proves our case. While the identification of the toes as anything specific in meaning is completely speculation, the identification of them would prove the interpretation of the commentator wrong. Since every detail is important, there is in no wise eleven toes on that statue. Since Vespasian was Caesar when Jerusalem fell, which marked the final end to the old Jewish Authority, much like David was anointed King and then had to wait until Saul died before he reigned in Jerusalem, and as Vespasian was the 10th ruler, this would only lend proof towards our approach, and away from the commentator. Domitian, the eleventh horn, or toe, didn’t rule until after 70 AD. In this way, it is noted that the ten toes are never directly interpreted as kings in the Word, but that the stone merely strikes on the feet. Further, it does not say which ‘kings’, but simply, ‘in the time of those kings’. Speculation beyond that may yield varying results, but it is simply that–speculation. That wicked leader is ultimately what supports every wicked empire. Daniel will see this more clearly in Daniel 7.
  2. Destroying that kingdom, specifically destroying the leader of that kingdom, crushes the power behind every evil empire. On the contrary, crushing the spiritual power behind the empire will result in the eventual defeat of its leader. The flesh profits nothing, it is the spirit that gives life. That is why it is said that it is the anointing that breaks the yoke. This is the mandate of the prayer movement, and why we engage the realms of darkness, wrestling, to overcome. Perhaps this is merely an oversight by the author, but, from a prayer movement perspective, there can be little variance from this point of view. The beast that arises among the ten kings is the foundation that the statue walks and stands on just as the ultimate harlot of Revelation 17 also rides and is carried by this beast. As said prior, the bottom of the statue is what comes last. At the destruction of that fourth kingdom, [Again, note, it is not sufficient to simply destroy the fourth kingdom–all four Kingdoms, both their spiritual power and their outward glory, must be destroyed ‘at the same time’. Since none of the first three exist in EITHER capacity, either Daniel 2 is fulfilled, or Daniel 2:35 is broken. Whatever broke them is God’s Kingdom] the stone that strikes it becomes a great mountain and fills the whole earth. As did the church in the thousand years after Rome disintegrated, interestingly enough. As corrected above, once the spiritual power of Rome was broken, the Kingdom could no longer be cohesive, and, as the YLT puts it, was ‘broken small’ and scattered by the wind. Various supporting texts could be given: Mark 1:15, Luke 13:18, Matthew 12:28, etc. In other words, the Millennial reign of Messiah over the nations begins with the end of the fourth kingdom. Hebrews 10:11-12 and 1 Corinthians 15:24, together, indicate that Jesus will sit upon His Throne in His Kingdom, as He is already doing right now, until the last enemy is defeated, death, and will then come back, resulting in giving the Kingdom back to the Father. At His Second Coming, He gives His Kingdom back to the Father, not sits in it. He is already seated on the throne.
    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. 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. (Daniel 2:34-35 NKJV)
  3. When Daniel interprets the dream, he expounds on the destruction of the fourth kingdom and gives another key timing indicator. Daniel tells us that the fourth kingdom is destroyed in the “days of these kings” – these are the ten kings of the ten toes [Actually, this is completely non-textual, and leads to false conclusions. You cannot even determine, contextually, whether ‘these kings’ refers specifically to the fourth empire, although that is probably true since the rock falls on the feet. It seems a reasonable conclusion that it would at least refer to the Fourth Kingdom’s Kings, rather than the kings in general, but as that is not even provable in the text, you certainly cannot determine beyond that and say that it must be in the ‘toes’, specifically. Of course, on another way of looking at it, it was, but, again, ‘sola scriptura’ denies this conclusion as being of any substantial influence. If it bears out to be true, fine, but no supporting conclusions can be made upon it alone] that Daniel 7 identifies as the ten horns that were on the beast of the fourth kingdom.
    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. 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.” (Daniel 2:44-45 NKJV)
    1. It must be the kings related to the fourth kingdom, because the statue is destroyed during the time of the fourth kingdom and we know the first three kingdoms, and kings, died long ago. This is proof that the fourth is gone as well. Daniel 2:35. Because Daniel 7 is so clear on the ten kings (Daniel 7:24), we are not at liberty to interpret these ten as anything other than real, human kings. Indeed they were. They’re names were: Augustus, Tiberius, Caligua, Claudius, Nero, Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian, and Titus. Domitian is 11th.
    2. This constrains the time of this kingdom, because it must both have ten kings and be destroyed within their lifetime. Again, claims made on conjecture do not constitute fact. Daniel confirms that it will be destroyed and that, never again, will the kingdom [NOTE: This refers to God’s Kingdom] be left “to other people.” In other words, it is the final empire led by fallen men. The Kingdom of God is, or was, established at this time. The claim, however, that it is the ‘final empire led by fallen men’ is misguided at best, and possibly deceptive, especially in light of the chapter. It is the Kingdom of God, specifically, that is not left to another people, for we will all live forever. This, then, is clear. However, even the chapter itself says clearly that the fourth beast is destroyed immediately, or was, and that the other three beasts were allowed to remain for some duration. This directly contradicts the statement, because the beasts represented empires. While the fourth empire, Rome, was completely destroyed, and the outward glory of all four was destroyed, the spiritual power of those other three nations remained, albeit with their world-wide, one-world governing authority or dominion stripped from them. This means exactly the opposite of what is stated here. There will, indeed, be these other nations for some period of time, and it will be the same demonic power that ran them, but they will never again have the world-wide influence over the affairs of men. There will be God’s Kingdom, filling and being in the whole Earth, and there will be nations yet led by men. Instead, God will establish His everlasting rule after He personally destroys the fourth kingdom. God did not establish His rule at this time. He ‘set up’ His Kingdom. This is not the beginning of His Kingdom, even as Daniel 4:1 drew a distinction between the statue that Nebuchadnezzar first ‘made’ and then ‘set up’, same word, God did not first ‘make’ a Kingdom to be set up here. It already was, of old. Psalm 93:2.
3. Daniel 7 confirms the timeline of Daniel 2 and gives even more information about the judgment of the kingdom by focusing the judgment not just on the kingdom, but specifically on the individual who ultimately gave this kingdom its great strength and terrible nature.
  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 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; 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. 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 7:8-11 NKJV)
  I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them 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… 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. 26’But the court shall be seated, And they shall take away his dominion, To consume and destroy it forever. (Daniel 7:21-22, 25-26 NKJV)
  1. Daniel tells us that the leader of this fourth kingdom will prevail against the saints until the Ancient of Days comes, a judgment is made in favor of the saints, and the time comes for the saints to possess the kingdom. Again, Domitian prevailed against the saints until God made His judgment. As in Daniel 2, this kingdom and its leader are stopped only by the appearance of God [This is either a clumsy reading of the text, or a deliberate oversight. Daniel 7:22 “came” describes the prior “throne room scene”, and describes the Ancient of Days “coming” to His courtroom, and cannot be understood as ‘to the earth’, as the commentator suggests. It is in contradiction to Daniel 7:9-10, which is the judgment that Daniel 7:22 describes. The ‘came’ can apply to nothing other than the Daniel 7:9 of Him taking His Seat, since the judgment described could come from no other place. The only possible reading of this excludes the commentator’s perspective as positively false.] and when this wicked ruler is stopped, it is the time for the saints to possess the kingdom. The King James reads ‘take the Kingdom’. The parallel between this and Matthew 11:12 are obvious. This event is clearly the Day of the Lord and Daniel would have understood it as the time when Messiah sets up His kingdom in Jerusalem and rules over the nations from Israel.
  2. Interestingly Daniel tells us that this horn has “eyes like a man” and a “mouth speaking pompous words.” This is very significant because the other ten horns are plainly interpreted as human kings. However, there is an indication that this horn is very different. It is a horn that has been given the appearance of a man, but is something much more than a man. As they all were–demonically inspired rules. This is why Daniel 7:20 describes him as “greater than his fellows” (NKJV), “larger in appearance” (NASB), and “more formidable than the others” (NET). Daniel 8 confirms this by saying that his power is “mighty, but not by his own power,” that he will challenge Messiah the “Prince of princes” in a way no other ruler has, and that he must be broken “without human means.”
    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. (Daniel 7:24 NKJV)
    His power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; He shall destroy fearfully, And shall prosper and thrive; He shall destroy the mighty, and also the holy people. …He shall even rise against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without human means. (Daniel 8:24-25 NKJV)
  3. By focusing on the individual that empowers the fourth kingdom to be so dreadfully different from any other kingdom on earth, Daniel 7 reveals why the destruction of the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 was the essential crushing of every other kingdom. The ruler that gives the fourth kingdom its terrible nature is ultimately the one who has animated and influenced every other historical evil empire. This is why his destruction not only destroys the fourth kingdom, it also essentially destroys the other evil empires and is enough to ensure there will never again be such a kingdom. This explanation is insufficient. None of the other three kingdoms exist, hence, they are already broken. So, Biblically, whatever broke them is God’s Kingdom.
  4. Though he is the evil influence that made the other empires wicked, he personally animates the fourth kingdom in a way that is completely different from the way he has influenced all other historical kingdoms. Though he has influenced other kingdoms through various proxy rulers, it begins to become clear that the fourth kingdom is the result of him taking the stage of history and personally leading a kingdom on the earth. No where, except in the mind of Bible commentators, does the devil ever become incarnate. Ever.
4. Daniel 7 describes an unparalleled persecution of Israel by this dreadful and terrible beast.
  I was watching; and the same horn was making war against the saints, and prevailing against them…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. (Daniel 7:21, 25 NKJV)
  1. The book of Daniel is an Israel-centric book and when Daniel used the word “saints” he would have been thinking of the remnant of Israel. Therefore the persecution that Daniel sees is an Israel-centric persecution focused on eliminating the Jews so that God is unable to fulfill His promises to them. If it need to refer to the church, the Gentiles grafted in and the unbelieving Jews broken off is a sufficient explanation. It makes little difference, however.
  2. He makes war on the Jews because it is in his heart to eliminate them. This is a key area where he is more dreadful than other ancient empires. Ancient empires such as Babylon and Rome attacked Israel with their military might primarily for political reasons related to Israel’s insurrection. This ruler will make was on the Jews simply because of their ethnicity in the same way Hitler made war on the Jewish people simply because they were Jewish. Speculation. He will persecute the ‘saints’. God is the ultimate interpreter of His Word, regardless of how someone at the time might have understood them. This is the point of the cross, portions were revealed, and portions were concealed, deliberately, for if the demonic realms had known what they were doing, they would not have crucified the King of Glory. It makes for good ‘story’, but if it isn’t supported by Scripture, it’s not regarded.
  3. We must remember that Daniel was living through the Babylonian invasion and exile and this was the context for the prophecy of a terrible future ruler who would “prevail” over Israel for a period of time. This “prevailing,” contextually, would be an attempt at something far worse than what happened in the Babylonian exile. It is why God judges the beast so finally and decisively. The need to stretch prevail to mean something else is meaningless, unless you’re simply trying to make your point look better than it already is. Let Scripture speak, and stay out of the way.
  4. The angel tells Daniel specifically that Israel will be given over to this leader for a time, times and half a time, which is 3 ½ years (The Hebrew equivalent of the phrase is also used in Daniel 12:7). This 3 ½ years ends with the establishment of the Messianic kingdom (Daniel 7:18) and therefore is Israel’s final, unequalled hour of trouble that brings the age to an end. This unequalled time of trouble is also known as “Jacob’s trouble” and it is the same time referenced in Jeremiah 30:7, Daniel 12:1, Joel 2:2, and Matthew 24:21-22. This is an amassing of various points of doctrine, the full scope of which will not be fully addressed here, however they are thoroughly covered in other places. The problems stem from a wrong understanding of Matthew 24:29, which incorrectly interpreted ‘eutheos’ as ‘immediately’, when it should simply read ‘next’. Additionally, Daniel 11:40-43 point to the Battle of Actium, which was the founding of the Roman empire, hence, placing the standing of Michael in Daniel 12:1 at the First Coming of Christ, and the time of great trouble of both clearly in 70 AD. The rest of these references refer to various periods, including the 3 1/2 years leading up to 70 AD’s final destruction. The ‘Great Tribulation’, then, is past, and the Second Coming described in Matthew 24:29-31, and later in the chapter were expressly excluded from the v34 ‘this generation’ by the introductory clause of v36, ‘but that day’ of which no one knows.
5. Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 both directly connect the fourth kingdom with the second coming. Not Established. By our account, not true.
  1. The fourth kingdom is directly connected with the coming of Messiah because He personally and suddenly destroys the kingdom. There is no textual ground for the claim. The Daniel 2 rock is most likely the Mark 14:58 temple, both made without hands. The Kingdom was given at Pentecost to the disciples, and did not, it appears, begin to take full authority until 70 AD, when the old Jewish order was eliminated, just as Saul had to die a before David could reign. The striking of the statue, then, it appears, happened at or around 70 AD, or shortly after, even as the rock had to fall before it struck the image. In Daniel 2:34 the rock not formed with hands strikes the kingdom and Daniel 7:22 records that this kingdom continues until the Ancient of Days comes. As stated before, this requirement of the ‘Ancient of Days’ coming is absolutely an incorrect reading of Daniel 7:22. This is why Daniel 2 tells us that once the kingdom is destroyed, there will never again be a kingdom led by wicked men (Daniel 2:44). And, again, this is ‘make-believe’. Some things are said just to make you believe it. It doesn’t make it true, and it certainly isn’t what the Book says.
  2. Because the coming of Messiah is directly connected to the end of the fourth kingdom, we must associate this kingdom with Jesus’ first or second coming. True, with all we understand and see. We agree with this portion of the statement.
    1. If we associate Daniel 2 and 7 with Jesus’ first coming, then we are forced to completely allegorize the passage and interpret it differently from the way Daniel and the angel interpreted it. Says who? Statements like this, completely unsupported, mind you, do nothing but steer one away from a point that is not easily defended. Understanding, of course, as well, that there are many other points of Eschatology that must be considered to make a full treatment of the subject, it, nevertheless, is an empty statement. There is no need to allegorize anything to interpret Daniel in any way other than how Jesus did in Mark 1:15, when He said the time was fulfilled and the Kingdom was at hand. Or, how Jesus, the ultimate authority in interpretation, defined the Kingdom for us in Luke 13:18, saying, “What is the Kingdom of Heaven like?” There is no way that Jesus, being who He was and what the Scriptures themselves say, could have meant anything other than the Daniel 2:35,44 kingdom, without being a deliberate deceiver and liar. God only has one Kingdom, and Jesus was not declaring it’s beginning with this statement, merely its proximity. This is the same Kingdom that the books of Chronicles calls David’s kingdom, calling either the throne or the Kingdom, the LORD’s. David’s throne, Biblically, was God’s throne, and this is the only Kingdom there ever will be, for it is everlasting. Psalm 145:13.
    2. If we associate it with Jesus’ second coming, which fits the language of the passage [Again, an unsupported claim, which may have some basis in their understanding of Matthew 24 and Daniel 11, but alternate readings of these cast difference of opinion upon], then we cannot place the kingdom in ancient history if we have an orthodox view of the second coming. This is only true in their reading of Matthew 24:29 being “immediately”, and a lack of ascribing the end of Daniel 11 to the beginning of Rome. Clearly, when one considers the interpretational considerations in Matthew 24 and so forth, there is no direct connection between the timing of the ‘Great Tribulation’ and the ‘Second Coming’. With them in mind, it is actually the preferred, natural reading of Matthew 24 to see that the 70 AD events MUST have been the primary and only intent of the Olivet Discourse’s portion dealing with Jerusalem, and that the Second Coming events are intentionally excluded from the timing elements, as the day and hour are unknown. This then positively eliminates this argument, placing the Great Tribulation in history, and the bodily, physical Second Coming of Christ, in accordance with Hebrews 10 and 1 Corinthians 15 in the future, most likely at the end in Revelation 20:11-15. The only way to associate this kingdom with Jesus’ second coming and identify it as a historical kingdom would be to adopt a preterist view of the second coming which says the second coming already happened “spiritually” – and virtually unnoticed – in the first century AD. Again, the need to connect the Kingdom and the Second Coming is not there, textually.
  3. Therefore, if we take an orthodox, literal view of Daniel and the Second Coming then the kingdom, and it’s destruction, occurs just previous to the visible, bodily return of Jesus to rule the nations. False, based on incorrect premises already noted.
6. By summarizing the information that Daniel gives about the fourth kingdom, we can clearly see when this kingdom emerges.
  1. The kingdom is divided under 10 kings (Daniel 2:41), but it is also destroyed during the reign of these kings (Daniel 2:34; 44; 7:23, 24). This means the kingdom only lasts for a relatively narrow window of time. False, again, as noted before. There is no textual necessity of ten concurrent kings.
  2. The characteristics of this kingdom ultimately come from a single “horn” who becomes the ruler of the kingdom (Daniel 7:8, 11, 20, 21, 24-27). The kingdom is ultimately the embodiment of this person. Absolute conjecture–no basis textually. Again, this puts the kingdom in a relatively narrow window of time. There cannot be a gap in time between the 10 kings and this ruler because it is clear that the kingdom is judged and destroyed in the days of the 10 kings and it Daniel 7 makes it clear that this ruler comes up among the 10 kings and even deposes some of them (Daniel 7:8, 20). ‘In the days of those kings’ is wrongly interpreted, but the 11th does come after the 10th.
    1. This terrible ruler is unequalled in human history and there are strong indications that he is something more than human (Daniel 7:8, 11; 8:24, 25). This reading completely ignores, blatantly and deliberately, without intellectual honesty, the clear attribution of other leaders with similar, yet different, features. The devil is bad enough without the need to follow in the way of the member of a gnostic cult, AW Pink, in rolling every negative title into one individual. What can be agreed upon is that Hitler was not the antichrist, but regardless, he came. As did Stalin, and Lenin, and a host of other antichrists. The issue is not whether there will be men who follow the devil for whatever reason. But, the premise presented here is based solely upon the popular necessity for it to be so, and does not whatsoever come from the Book. There most likely will be unprecedented evil men and leaders who come forth, perhaps unlike the world has seen. But, just as Hitler was not that, and was demon possessed, is this the coming from what God said, or from what we have built up in regards to these things. We should always be on guard against all things, and we should pray for all in authority and leadership, that we might lead quiet and peaceable lives. And, if wicked rulers arise, we should pray for God’s real, actual Kingdom to be made manifest in our lives, that we might continue in His Peace, Hope, and Love. This is the reason he is judged uniquely and differently from the other kings. There is, of course, some level of uniqueness to his judgment, but the Lake of Fire is the ultimate destination for all who do not choose Christ.
    2. Just as the ruler is unequalled, so too the kingdom is unequalled. None of the brutal empires of antiquity can compare with this kingdom (Daniel 7:7, 19, 23-24).
    3. This wicked horn leads an unequalled persecution of Israel that lasts 3 ½ years (Daniel 7:25). It is terrible, but it is brief. God does not allow this king to go unchallenged for very long, only long enough for him to reveal his nature, test the hearts of men, and serve God’s purposes. Matthew 24 and Daniel 12 were fulfilled in 70 AD, as established elsewhere.
  3. This kingdom will be destroyed suddenly and destroyed by God Himself. When it is destroyed, God immediately transitions the earth to the rule of His Son and His kingdom (Daniel 2:35, 44-45; 7:9-14, 18, 26-26). False, at least as presented. God the Father passes judgment upon the beast’s kingdom from His Throne, not the Earth. This is historical. Christ is now seated on His Throne, the Throne of David, the Throne of the LORD. He must remain there until the last enemy is defeated, death, which occurs in Revelation 20:14, at the Second Coming. At that time, Christ hands the Kingdom back to His Father, at or after the Second Coming, not sits in it. His Kingdom is now, as is evident in the Gospels. The time of Messianic rule, of the restoring the nation to Israel (Acts 1:6), most likely pertains to the time period between Revelation 20:10-11. All Israel is saved, they are cured of their backsliding, and the church of Jerusalem is the center of it all. There is no need for Christ Jesus to sit on a physical, wooden chair in the city, since just as Hebrews says the heavenly priesthood is better, so is the heavenly kingship. He must be priest and King together, and Hebrews clearly says that if he was a priest on the Earth, it would not be sufficient for our selves. So, too, He is not going to give that up to become a King on the Earth. The Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent and believe the Gospel!
    1. It is the end of Israel’s long persecution and is instead the time for Israel to possess the kingdom and for the Messianic rule to begin.
      Happens, as it appears to us, between Revelation 20:10-11. It’s what we like to refer to as “extra-millennial”–the extra “millennium”, if you can call it that, of Revelation 20.
    2. The “different” nature of the fourth kingdom is what leads to its “different” destruction (Daniel 7:9-14; 26-27). Conjecture.
    3. It is also the end of the kingdoms of fallen men in this age. Never again will there be an evil empire in this age (Daniel 2:44). Absolutely false, based upon Daniel 7:12. Additionally, the whole of the futurist position is drawn into question on this verse alone, as we see it. For what ‘season and time’ are the lives of the first three demonic beasts prolonged for, and for what purpose? This clearly indicates a reduced scale, but still demonic empire upon the Earth for some duration, a fact not often addressed in the discussion of Daniel 7’s beasts.
7. Though Daniel 2 and 7 both begin with symbolic pictures, specific details about those pictures are interpreted for us so that we can have understanding of the nature and timing of the final kingdom. While He did not give us everything we might want to know, it is important that we take what He did interpret for us literally and seriously. With that in mind, we can begin to see more clearly what this kingdom is and how it affects our understanding of the book of Daniel. What’s just as important is that we do not fall into the same trap as John the Baptist, asking through his disciples, “Are you the one that was to come, or should we look for another?” Effectively, in the light of Mark 1:15 and Luke 13:18, among many others, including Acts 28:31, we are saying, “Is this the Kingdom that was to come, or should we look for another?” The answer is the same as Jesus’, “The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them. And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in me.” Matthew 11:5-6. Jesus came to bring us the Kingdom, and that was all of His teaching. It is clear that His teachings are binding on the church today, as Matthew 28 indicates, as well as the teachings of Paul. It is clear in Acts 8 and Acts 28, among others, that it was the Gospel of the Kingdom that was preached, and is the only Gospel there is. If we do not take Christ seriously about what He said His Kingdom was, since He said one had already been conferred upon Himself in Luke 22, how can we ever expect to find any deep, meaningful favor of God, in the dimension and understanding that He has called us to. If we want to take things “literally and seriously”, we should start with this, John 3:3,5. “Jesus replied, Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again. … Jesus answered, Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.” The Kingdom, then, is invisible and unenterable by the nonbeliever, the pagan, the ungodly. Contrary wise, if it is visible or enterable by them, it is not the Kingdom. No matter what happens to Jerusalem, even if there is a ‘government center’, if it is anything other than of the nature and character that Jesus described, it is decidedly NOT His Kingdom. Jesus’ literal and serious way of interpreting the Kingdom was that it was spiritual. How about you?
THE FOURTH KINGDOM MUST BE THE ANTICHRIST’S KINGDOM
1. By looking at how Daniel describes the fourth kingdom it becomes clear that this cannot be any historical kingdom. No kingdom in history fulfills even the basic descriptions of this kingdom and none can fulfill the timing requirement. Unfortunately for the futurist, no future kingdom of any kind can ever fulfill the requirement of Daniel 2:35. The outward glory of all four kingdoms must be destroyed together. Even a revived Roman empire will never suffice, for it must have all four revived together. On top of that, Nebuchadnezzar must be the head, and so it must be his Babylon that is destroyed. This means, not only would all four empire must needs be restored, but Nebuchadnezzar himself must be raised from the dead to start it. As absurd as this sounds, this is precisely the requirement of Daniel 2. The fact that every other scripture can be understood to mean precisely that, and line upon line upon precept and precept can be established that point, in the best of our objective study, only to this conclusion, it would seem to leave the burden of proof that the Fourth Kingdom was not Rome, and that the Beast of Revelation 13, as described elsewhere, is not Domitian, whose name in gematria is 666. It must be the future antichrist kingdom and identifying this is important for how we understand the rest of the book of Daniel, because, once we understand that it is the antichrist’s kingdom, it unifies and opens up the book of Daniel. Only the traditional reading of Matthew 24:29 as “immediately”, seeming to wrongly connect the Great Tribulation and the Second Coming, establishes this understanding. Removing this, there is no need to understand these things in this way.
2. Understanding and interpretation are key themes that show up repeatedly in the book of Daniel. God intended that Daniel’s visions would be easy and straightforward to understand, particularly for the generation at the end. They are. Revelation 17’s “Babylon” is Rome, because what you call the head, you also call the foot, referring to Daniel’s 4-part statue. The symbolism is straight-forward, and Daniel’s prophecies concluded with the coming of Messiah at His first Coming, and the events following thereafter.
  1. This is precisely why the symbols used in the book of Daniel are mostly straightforward. In addition, the visions themselves are interpreted for Daniel by an angel so that he can understand what he is shown.
  2. The fourth kingdom is clear as well. There is no need to force fit it where it does not fit. Just as the other descriptions of kingdoms literally describe specific kingdoms, so too the fourth kingdom is a specific kingdom. Nothing fits it yet because it hasn’t emerged yet. God is not veiling it or making it difficult to understand. He describes specific characteristics of the kingdom so we will know what it will look like, can understand it, and can warn others about it. The bulk of the evidences provided have no firm basis in the text. The ones that appeared to, such as Daniel 11 and Matthew 24, are proven to be wrongly evaluated.
  3. Because of the specific language use to describe this final kingdom there also is not room for a “partial fulfillment.” The primary characteristics of the kingdom and the fact that the kingdom has to be completely different from any other kingdom in history automatically exclude any kingdom partially fulfilling the prophecy. Agreed that there is no partial fulfillment. There is no future ‘antichrist’, per se, as Revelation 13 was fulfilled in the First Century.
3. While many have sought for a historical fulfillment, the language that Daniel uses to describe this kingdom do not allow for a historical fulfillment. As the commentator has understood it. The kingdom must be initially divided by 10 kings [As the commentator interprets the verses, notwithstanding the fact that the language does not require it], ruled over by an unparalleled beast [Which Domitian, called ‘the beast’ by Greeks and many others, indeed was], be dramatically different from every other historical kingdom [the ‘difference’ is exagerrated–Let the text speak for itself.], last only for a relatively short season [Misapplication of premises], and finally be destroyed by the appearance of Messiah [Which Rome was, through the church in the power of the Holy Spirit. The Specifics and expectations of the commentator are what are in doubt] and the establishment of His kingdom [If Paul wasn’t preaching the Kingdom of God in Acts 28:31 and Phillip in Acts 8, then there is no Gospel.]. No kingdom that fulfills these criteria has yet appeared in human history. Rome fits the text.
4. Many commentators either try to apply the Roman Empire or the Islamic empire to the fourth kingdom, but neither fulfill what Daniel has prophesied.
  1. The Roman Empire was first proposed as the fourth kingdom by the early church because this interpretation made sense in their historical context. The early church had urgent expectation of Jesus’ return and Rome was the dominant power on the earth. It eventually began to systematically oppress believers, and eventually destroyed Jerusalem and slaughtered an enormous number of Jews in the process. It certainly appeared as if Rome could become the fourth kingdom. However, we can now look at Rome historically and see that none of the verses match Rome, even partially, as being a fulfillment of this prophecy.
    1. Some commentators have assumed that Rome should be the fourth kingdom because it’s the next major empire in the region. This is logical, but not a critical issue because the fourth kingdom is the final one of this age and the kingdom of ancient Rome has ended. The supposition is wrong, and ignores the fact that the first three have ended as well.Because the end of the fourth kingdom is the end of the age , there must be a gap in the timeline of empires somewhere . Because the third kingdom has historical fulfillment, the gap in the timeline fits best between the third and fourth kingdoms. The gap is not needed.
    2. In the book of Revelation, John is told that the ten king kingdom, the one Daniel refers to as the fourth kingdom, has not yet come. In other words, John is told that Daniel’s fourth kingdom is in the future after the time of Rome.The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. (Revelation 17:12 NKJV). This is interpretation, built up a few layers from premises that were not proven.
    3. John is also told that the kingdom of the ten kings will actually make war on the Lamb something no kingdom has yet done.These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them… (Revelation 17:14 NKJV). There were ten historic persecutions of the Church by the Roman Empire.
    4. Rome was a long-running empire that slowly self destructed and was eventually conquered up by the Ottoman empire. It was not a short-lived empire led by 10 kings and then destroyed by the return of Jesus. Once the spiritual power, or beast, was defeated, the physical components could no longer be maintained. Hence, as the YLT translates it, they were broken small, scattered to the wind, and no place was found for them. The rest of the premise is unproven.
    5. Rome was not any more cruel than any other ancient empire. It was not completely different from the others; on the other hand it was remarkably similar to them. In some ways Rome was a relatively tolerant empire that left many aspects of conquered cultures and societies intact. Hence, it was a mixed empire. It did not Hellenize like the Greeks.
    6. Even Rome’s war on Israel does not meet the requirements of Daniel 7. Rome was relatively tolerant of Jews and even cooperated with the temple service in Jerusalem. Their destruction of Jerusalem was primarily political and as a reaction to the Jewish revolutionaries. Josephus even records that Titus offered to make peace and not destroy Jerusalem. This is not to minimize the immense suffering that Rome caused Israel or the anti-Semitic acts of Romans soldiers. However, it must be understood that Rome’s war on Israel, just like Babylon’s, was for political purposes as a response to Israel’s rebellion rather than a war on the Jews to primarily oppose God’s purposes for them.
    7. While the option of Rome as the fourth kingdom made some sense in the first century, the history of Rome shows us that it is clearly not what Daniel calls the fourth kingdom. The only reason to see Rome as the fourth kingdom is to attempt to show a historical fulfillment of Daniel’s prophesies. The problem is that the wording of the prophecy requires a future, final kingdom. It demands the question of faith – has God, through Daniel, predicted a future kingdom that will match Daniel’s description of that kingdom? Rome, as it were, is the only logical choice. Not only does it fit all of the textual requirements, but there are no missing ‘shins’ in Daniel 2’s statue. That is, from Nebuchadnezzar to the decline of Rome, there was a one-world government, and that, from start to finish, was called Babylon in the eyes of Scripture. Hence, when John used the term in Revelation 17, the mystery he referred to was Daniel 2’s statue. Hence, Rome is Babylon, as was Greece and Media-Persia. They constituted, for almost 1000 years, the demonic empire upon the Earth. And, for the next 1000 years, called the ‘dark ages’ in reference to the ‘light of Rome’ (if that’s light, I want darkness), there were no ‘great beasts’ ruling over the Earth. The attribution of many of the scriptures to the Millennium of Revelation 20:1-6 is unnecessary, and can be fulfilled in between Revelation 20:10-11.
  2. Having seen that the Roman Empire did not meet the criteria of the fourth kingdom, some have proposed that the Islamic empire could be the fulfillment of the fourth kingdom.
    1. The historical Islamic empire fails to meet the requirements of the fourth kingdom for many of the same reasons that Rome does not meet the requirement. The historical empire did not fulfill the specific elements that Daniel prophesied and slowly crumbled and ultimately fell in the 20th century with the fall of the Ottoman Empire. It absolutely fails on every account. When the statue of Daniel 2 transitioned from metal to metal, while there was physical conflict, the previous empire remained, such that they were all broken together. Daniel 2:35. This happened with the progression from Babylon to Rome, but has no meaning whatsoever when applied to the Islamic view. Daniel 2:35 is just as necessary to be taken literally as any of the rest, and it requires a simultaneous breaking of what we have come to refer to as ‘Western Civilization’.
    2. There are elements of Islamic belief and Islam’s history that show some similarity to the description of the beast, so it is very possible that Islamic ideology could empower the fourth kingdom and even lead to the emergence of the fourth kingdom, but the historical Islamic empire does not fulfill the specific things Daniel said about the fourth kingdom. There is no ultimate correlation.
  3. Both the Roman and Islamic Empire have affected the earth in a negative way, but neither continued until the Ancient of Days came (Daniel 7:22) [A false stipulation] and neither historical empire can be the fourth kingdom [As stated, Rome can]. Thus far there is no empire in history that meets the requirements of Daniels’ prophecy. Except Rome.
THE UNITY OF DANIEL’S VISIONS
1. Once we know that the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 is the final antichrist kingdom, we can see that the historical gap in the two chapters occurs between Greece and the antichrist kingdom. In Daniel 8 and Daniel 11 we see the exact same transition from describing the ancient Greek empire to describing the person of the antichrist. Alternately understood, there is no need.
  1. 1. This means that the prophecies of Daniel 2, 7, 8, and 11 all contain a unified storyline and all transition at the same point from ancient history to the rule of the antichrist. Each of them uses the Seleucid Empire to set the stage for the antichrist’s kingdom. They do, indeed, contain a unified storyline, that, apparently, concluded with the coming of Christ’s Kingdom at the time of Christ.
  2. Daniel 7:19 highlights the fourth beast’s nails of bronze. Bronze is the metal that described the Greek empire in Daniel 2. The fourth beast is connected to the Greek empire in an interesting way. It is as though to emphasize that he walks out of the Greek empire since bronze is on his feet – the same thing that Daniel 8 and Daniel 11 emphasize. Rome.
  3. Daniel 8:23 sets the time of the antichrist’s kingdom as the “latter time” of a Seleucid like empire. September, 31 BC.
  4. Interestingly in Daniel 10:20 the angel ends his description of the spiritual conflict with the prince of Greece. And then describes the progression from the end of Media-Persia to the time of Caesar Augustus.
2. All four visions in Daniel tell the same storyline. Just as the four gospels give us four portraits of Jesus, so too the four visions of Daniel are four different portraits of the antichrist and his kingdom. Yes, all four pictures of the same time period, from Nebuchadnezzar to the time of Christ and the early church.
3. The transition in both Daniel 8 and 11 show the antichrist rising out of what was historically the Seleucid portion of the ancient Greek empire (A very large area stretching from eastern Turkey to Afghanistan). The purpose of the visions is to set the stage for the antichrist; therefore there is no need to highlight any kingdoms that do not serve the purpose of setting the stage for the antichrist. God, in His wisdom, chose to reveal the emergence of the antichrist to Daniel through three historical empires. While Daniel 8 strictly Greece and Antiocus Epiphanes, Daniel 11 gives further detail. The events contained therein are fully fulfilled.
  1. The antichrist comes from the region of the ancient Greek empire, so the historical kingdoms end there. The fact that he arises out of the Seleucid Empire indicates that it may well be the most important ancient kingdom of all to understand as a prototype for the development of the fourth kingdom.
  2. Because Daniel 8 and Daniel 11 present the antichrist as emerging from the remnants of the Seleucid empire, it is important to understand the geography of that empire while also remembering that the fourth kingdom is completely different from all the rest and therefore will be unique. Though evil empires foreshadow the antichrist’s empire in some fashion, we have to be careful with how we allow our understanding of any previous empire to influence the way we understand the antichrist empire.
    1. For example, when most people think “Greece” they think the modern state of Greece and they think of secular humanism. However, the Seleucid kingdom included eastern Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran and many other Middle Eastern nations. The empire was also not secular, but committed to the worship of false gods.
    2. Antiochus was not a secular humanist. Though he glorified man, and himself, his point of contention with the Jews was the worship of Greek gods, not secularism. His “abomination” was requiring Jewish worship of his god in the temple.
    3. This region has also been entrenched in Islam for over 1,000 years. Islam is the stronghold in this region and could also serve as the launching pad for the antichrist’s religion. Just as Antiochus was influenced by the prevailing system of thought in this region in his day, so too a leader in this region could be influenced by the prevailing system of thought in this region in our day and use it to exalt himself and enforce his will.
    4. While we need to understand what the Scripture intends us to learn from the Seleucid kingdom, we also have to be careful to be true to what the Scripture says and to be open where it is not specific. The Scripture holds us in tension and forces us to watch and pray by being silent on certain issues.
4. Daniel’s prophecy that the antichrist arises from the Greek (Seleucid) empire is consistent with other eschatological passages that reference the Greek empire in an eschatological context. The antichist, by and large, as presented in modern eschatology, is a thing of theological invention.
  1. Joel 3 God describes His final judgment of the nations and He judges the nations close to Israel specifically because they have sold Judah and Jerusalem to the Greeks for the purpose of taking the people far away into exile. Also the people of Judah and the people of Jerusalem You have sold to the Greeks, That you may remove them far from their borders. (Joel 3:6 NKJV)
  2. Zechariah 9 refers to the final conflict of the age as the conflict between the “sons of Zion” and the “sons of Greece.”For I have bent Judah, My bow, Fitted the bow with Ephraim, And raised up your sons, O Zion, Against your sons, O Greece, And made you like the sword of a mighty man.” (Zechariah 9:13 NKJV)
  3. Revelation 13 emphasizes that the kingdom is “like a leopard” a clear reference to Greece in Daniel 7. It does not say he is a leopard and therefore is Greece, but the beast is like a leopard. This gives the vision unity with Daniel’s visions and the same emphasis. It has components, such as the feet of a bear, that ties it to other wicked empires, but it has the shape and form of the Greek beast. 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. (Revelation 13:2 NKJV)
5. Because each of Daniel’s visions follow the same progression, it is important for us to see that the revelation becomes progressively more and more specific throughout the book. As Daniel asks, God gives increased revelation specifically on the fourth kingdom and particularly on the antichrist because he is the one who gives definition and identity to the fourth kingdom. God gives Daniel some information about the antichrist in Daniel 7 and Daniel 8, but by Daniel 11 he gives Daniel the longest, more detailed sequence of events in the Bible related to the person of the antichrist. Each of Daniel’s visions follows the same progression, for they all fall in the same timeline as that of Daniel 2’s four successive kingdoms, followed by Christ’s, as represented by the church.
6. God expands the revelation of the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 by expanding the revelation of the antichrist in each succeeding vision. The answer to Daniel’s questions about the fourth kingdom in Daniel 7:28, were subsequent detailed revelations of the antichrist. There is a clear progression of revelation in the book of Daniel. God gives a little information and then Daniel returns to the place of fasting and prayer asking for more revelation.
  Then it happened, when I, Daniel, had seen the vision and was seeking the meaning, that suddenly there stood before me one having the appearance of a man. (Daniel 8:15 NKJV)
  … And in his upper room, with his windows open toward Jerusalem, he knelt down on his knees three times that day, and prayed and gave thanks before his God, as was his custom since early days. (Daniel 6:10b NKJV)
  Now while I was speaking, praying, and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the LORD my God for the holy mountain of my God, yes, while I was speaking in prayer, the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, reached me about the time of the evening offering. (Daniel 9:20-21 NKJV)
  Then he said to me, “Do not fear, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart to understand, and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard; and I have come because of your words. (Daniel 10:12 NKJV)
7. God continues giving Daniel more revelation throughout his life, because he is asking and praying, for revelation on the four main kingdoms that are introduced in Daniel 2. It is a major theme of Daniel that intercession unlocks revelation. What is shocking is that the increase of revelation in the book of Daniel is an increase in revelation about the person of the antichrist. May we all continue to pray and seek His face and desire the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation.
THE VISION IS SEALED UNTIL THE TIME OF THE END
1. Daniel’s book finishes with a very clear warning about how we are to interpret the book. And he said, “Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. (Daniel 12:9 NKJV)
2. What is spoken in the book of Daniel is sealed until the time of the end. Therefore, the book itself can only be fully understood as we draw near to the final generation. [Popular interpretation, and possibly has some merit, although it could be applied to mean some things slightly different] God has given things in Daniel that are unknowable until the end of the age and yet they were written down nearly 2,500 years ago. Only God gave give this kind of revelation and He gave it as a witness to the earth that He alone is God. This is why Daniel’s revelation is a holy thing and it is a dangerous thing to put things in Daniel into antiquity that God has said belong to the future. And, it is equally dangerous thing to put things in Daniel into the future that God has said belong to us today. The Kingdom, in particular, was the authority by which Jesus cast out demons. Matthew 12:28. This was not restricted to Jesus’ own physical presence, as He also gave the 12 and then 72 authority to cast out demons, and they did it, by the same finger or spirit of God, without his physical presence. Luke 22 says He conferred a Kingdom upon them, even as the Father had conferred one upon Him. This was past tense. It is equally dangerous to continually defy the Grace and Provision of God in giving us the Kingdom, by continually pushing its acknolwedgement to another day. Since it was the authority primarily, above the power, by which Jesus cast out demons, although it involved both, it can be said that if the Kingdom is not here today, there is no legal case for authentic, Christian deliverance. This must be addressed by all who say that the Kingdom must wait until another day. If there is no Kingdom, all deliverance is illegitimate, and hence, there is no freedom from the believer. It is only in the context of the authority of the Kingdom that we have the right, not just the power, to command spirits to obey us in the name of Jesus, and, barring that authority, we are indeed orphans in this life, with no covering. As, from Matthew through all the Epistles, and to today, it is the Gospel of the Kingdom we preach, there is and can be no other message other than, Repent! For the Kingdom of God is at hand. It came with Jesus in proximity, as He is it’s only Door, and of the increase of it’s government and peace there shall be no end.
3. In nearly every case, we should be very careful to go beyond historical orthodoxy, but in the case of Daniel there is a divine warning that the proper understanding is actually unknowable until the end of the age. Regardless, and meaningless, ultimately. Other, than, simply to say, study to show yourself approved. As it turns seems, many in the Middle Ages believed themselves to be in the Millennium, which appears to be correct. Many today are looking for a Gog Magog conflict, Revelation 20:7-10, which, indeed, is our estimation of where we are standing.
  1. For example, the first century believers who wondered if Daniel’s fourth beast was Rome were doing the best they could with the information they had. However, Gabriel specifically warns us that Daniel’s revelation will only be plain and understood at the time of the end. Again, this is a clear over-extension of the plain reading of the text, and is not scholarship.
  2. While we should always be very slow to deviate from the traditional understanding of the church, Gabriel hints to us that there are things in Daniel that are actually not able to be discerned until the time of the end. According to one reading.
  3. We have already seen that all the historical interpretations do not match what is predicted in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 and Daniel 12 gives us the confidence to not cling to a historical interpretation that does not match what Daniel said. And, yet, a fresh look at pertinent aspects reveal that, perhaps, the truth is lying right there in plain sight all along, anyway.
CONCLUSIONS
1. When we look at the description of the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 and 7, we can see several clear requirements for the fourth kingdom:
  1. It must be a divided kingdom under 10 kings (Daniel 2:41; Daniel 7:7, 20, 24). False.
  2. The kingdom must be destroyed within the lifetime of the ten kings (Daniel 2:44). False.
  3. There must be division among the 10 leading to 3 of the kings ultimately being deposed (Daniel 2:42; 7:8, 24). False.
  4. An individual will begin as a “little horn,” but suddenly become much greater and different from the rest. He is the one who gives the fourth kingdom identity. He is different and greater than all other rulers (Daniel 7:8, 11, 20, 24). Daniel hints repeatedly that this is a supernatural being and far more than a mere man (Daniel 7:8, 11-12, 19-20, 24, 8:24-25). False and wild speculation.
  5. The kingdom will be completely “different” from all other kingdoms. It will be of a different “kind or class” according to the definition of the Aramaic word used and will trample the whole earth (Daniel 2:40; 7:19, 23). It therefore cannot be compared to any other ancient kingdom and, by the language, a kingdom of this kind can only appear once in history. False, and a false hermenutic. Overemphasized for the purpose of making ones’ own point look better.
  6. It will be terrible, devouring, trampling, and crushing all else (Daniel 2:40; 7:7, 19, 23). A quote from the text.
  7. The kingdom will endure only a brief period of time (Daniel 2:44; 7:25). False.
  8. The kingdom will be completely and suddenly destroyed by the appearance of Messiah and the appearance of God. The kingdom of Messiah will begin while the remnants of the ten king confederation is still in place (Daniel 2:44-45; 7:9-14, 22, 26-27). False and false.
  9. When the fourth kingdom is destroyed, the evil that animated all previous kingdoms is destroyed (Daniel 2:44). No other kingdom led by wicked men will succeed this kingdom. It is the final empire of the age (Daniel 2:44; 7:26). False, and in denial of Daniel 7:12.
  10. Israel will be subjected to the ruler of this kingdom for 3 ½ years and will be persecuted horribly (Daniel 7:21, 25). When the time ends, the persecution of Israel will end, Israel will come into her inheritance, and the judgment will happen (Daniel 7:9-14, 18, 22, 26, 27). False.
2. When we look at Daniel’s predictions regarding this kingdom, there is no kingdom in antiquity that fulfills the characteristics of the fourth kingdom. The language describing the kingdom also excludes multiple or partial fulfillments. False.
  1. There are many historical empires that have been wicked, such as the Babylonian Empire, the Medo-Persian Empire, the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire, the Islamic Empire, the Nazi Regime, the Soviet Union, and many others. Each of these foreshadows certain elements of the antichrist kingdom, but none fit the specific description of the fourth empire and none are a complete foreshadowing of his kingdom.
  2. The empire in history that foreshadows the antichrist kingdom most specifically is Nazi Germany who was ruled by a “little horn,” made war on the Jews horrifically, attempted a “final solution” against the Jews for 3 ½ years, sought to establish a 1,000 year rule, and lasted only a brief while.
3. Interestingly Daniel 8 and Daniel 11, while referring to the antichrist, are foreshadowed in the actions of Antiochus in ancient history. Antiochus’ brutal reign is similar to many of the prophecies regarding the antichrist though he clearly falls short of fulfilling them. Completely historically fulfilled.
  1. While we are given a specific preview of the person of the antichrist in Antiochus, it is notable that we are not given a specific preview of the fourth kingdom until the reign of Adolf Hitler. It is notable that, while all ancient empires passed through a succession of rulers that did wickedly, Nazi Germany was essentially built around a single wicked man. In the same way the fourth kingdom is essentially built around a single wicked man.
  2. The reason there is an ancient prototype in the person of Antiochus, but not an ancient prototype of the kingdom is because the primarily point of Daniel is the expanding vision of the person of the antichrist. Without this person you cannot have the fourth kingdom so foreshadowing this person is far more important than foreshadowing a kingdom. If you understand him, you understand his kingdom. However, understanding ancient empires is not enough to understand the uniqueness of this individual.
  3. There is not a complete ancient prototype for the fourth kingdom. It is too utterly different because one that is completely different, one that is of a different kind or class, leads it.
4. Of course, whatever wickedness was in each ancient empire certainly lives on in the fourth empire because it is lead by the beast that has animated and influenced wickedness throughout history. The spiritual wickedness present in each kingdom will continue on to the end, so there is spiritual continuity between all empires that have ruled the earth. False. Daniel 7 indicates the spiritual power, but Daniel 2 indicates the physical glory. The realm of both of these for all three initial kingdoms is completely destroyed at the time of Rome, indicating a complete fulfillment.
  1. The continuity of spiritual wickedness is very different from the political kingdom that Daniel sees in Daniel 2 and 7. The political and governmental expression of the fourth kingdom is separate and distinct and cannot be put in the continuum of any previous empire, though all historical empires are building to this kingdom and whatever spiritual wickedness is in each one of them will crescendo in the final one.
  2. We can learn from the wickedness in each historical empire. For example, we can see similarities in the coming desolation of Jerusalem and the ancient siege by Babylon and Rome even though both of their sieges were primarily triggered by Israel’s political rebellion rather than by rage against the covenant. As another example we can see similarities in the way the Islamic empire conquered, combined religion and state into one unbending reality, and persecuted both Christians and Jews.
5. Radical Islam, with its constant focus on the elimination of the state of Israel, its drive to rule over Jerusalem, its violent anti-Semitism, and its domination by fear may very well be setting the stage for the antichrist kingdom. There are certainly many elements of the antichrist kingdom that are present in the theology of Islam. However, no previous Islamic empire is capable of matching any of the descriptions of Daniel’s fourth kingdom.
6. To be true to the text, we must stand with the stigma of Daniel. There is a stigma to Daniel’s prophecy and God will not allow us to rescue it by prematurely marking the prophecies fulfilled. The language will not let us do that either with the prophecies regarding the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 or the prophecies regarding the antichrist in Daniel 8 and Daniel 11 that come later in the book. Fulfilled prophecies are fulfilled, whether man acknowledges it or not.
  1. The “words” (Daniel 12:9), meaning the visions described, are understood only at the time of the end. Each of the four visions in Daniel 2, 7, 8, and 11 awaits its final, future fulfillment. False.
  2. In both cases, Daniel prophesies specific things that have not yet happened in history and to be honest in our hermeneutic we cannot force fit things that do not fulfill what Daniel has prophesied. To be honest in our hermeneutic means being honest on all levels, and not simply exaggerating a point to make our case more attractive. An honest hermeneutic, taking into consideration the various points of Daniel 2, Daniel 11, and Matthew 24, point to a fully fulfilled understanding of the prophecies of Daniel
7. Our view of Daniel goes to the root of our view of Scripture. God is forcing the issue – will we stand with the word as prophesied or will we try to rescue God and make our faith more respectable and remove some of the stigma of Daniel’s prophecies? God forces us to answer the question of whether Daniel’s prophecies have ultimately failed because nothing in history has fulfilled them accurately or whether the God of history can yet fulfill, in every detail, what Daniel prophesied.
  The question is, “Did God really say?” In the case of Matthew 24, traditional readings of the text were wrong, and overlooked the intentional exclusion of vv29-31 by the introduction of v36 with the word “but”. This would make the plain reading of the discourse’s Great Tribulation in 70 AD, in “this generation” (because vv1-3 are talking about the then visible building), and the Second Coming, the bodily, physical return of Christ Jesus, at a day and hour yet unknown, for as the lightning in the East is seen in the West, it will be unmistakable.

The approach presented here, while not in complete summary, is flawed, in that it fails to establish its major premises on the sole authority of Scripture. Many alternatives to the text, while still using proper Hermeneutic, defeat any attempt to “prove” any case, while a wide variety of other texts appear, to us anyway, to have no other alternative, or at least no primary sense alternative, than a fully fulfilled Daniel, and a Great Tribulation that is already in the Past.

Samuel Whitefield – Understanding the Fourth Kingdom of Daniel 2 and 7 – Part 1

Search Site

Study Sections