# comment

text:
<p>Afterward he measured one thousand; and it was a river that I could not pass through; for the waters were risen, waters to swim in, a river that could not be passed through-"Passed through"is the term used in <a href='B:290 33:21'>Isa 33:21</a> of how no ship or boat would pass through or along the new"broad rivers and streams"in the restored Kingdom. But the returning exiles could miraculously pass through this river with God’s miraculous help (s:w. <a href='B:290 43:2'>Isa 43:2</a>).</p>


text:
<p>He said to me, Son of man, have you seen this? Then he brought me and caused me to return to the bank of the river- The question seems to imply that Ezekiel had failed to notice something, and so he had to return to the riverbank.</p>


text:
<p>Now when I had returned, see, on the bank of the river were very many trees on the one side and on the other- <a href='B:730 22:2'>Rev 22:2</a> quotes this but in a very symbolic context. This will come true at the Lord’s return, but in a figurative sense; for Revelation 22 is not at all literal but symbolic. These things could have literally come about at the restoration from Babylon, as God’s miraculous response to their obedience. But they didn’t, because Judah were not switched on to the huge Divine potential which there was.</p>


text:
<p>Then he said to me, These waters issue forth toward the eastern region, and shall go down into the Salt Sea Arabah; and the waters of the sea shall be healed- The healing of saltiness, a symbol of bareness, will not be complete in the area (:11). This seems somehow inappropriate to the Kingdom to be established by the Lord Jesus in the future; but it rings true for a scenario at the restoration whereby Judah’s repentant obedience to the plans of Ezekiel 40-46 would have been rewarded by God making miraculous things happen. The same words are used in <a href='B:120 2:21-22'>2Ki 2:21-22</a> of the healing of salty waters by Elisha. Such things had been done by God’s power earlier in human history, and could have been repeated at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen, that every living creature which swarms, in every place where the rivers come, shall live; and there shall be a very great multitude of fish; for these waters have come there, and the waters of the sea shall be healed, and everything shall live wherever the river comes- The plural"rivers"may just be an intensive plural referring to ’the great river’. Malachi had likewise foreseen a situation at the restoration where"in every place"Gentiles would have been spiritually healed and turned to Yahweh (<a href='B:460 1:11'>Mal 1:11</a>)."Every living creature which swarms"is the language of creation, as if a new creation was going to come about in that local area. The river of living water, as explained on :1, refers now to the Spirit which is given to us and flows from us. Wherever we go, there should be healing- not just dissension, theological controversy and factionism, but real healing for those who hitherto had not had spiritual life. The great multitude of fish is again alluded to in John’s Gospel, where the miracles of catching fish are used as symbolic of how the Lord’s people would"catch men"in the Gospel’s net. The physical realities didn’t come about at the restoration, but the essence of them now comes true in the lives of Spirit filled believers.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen, that fishermen shall stand by it: from En Gedi even to En Eglaim shall be a place for the spreading of nets; their fish shall be after their species, as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many- The two locations mentioned are at the north and south of the Dead Sea. The"fish::. after their species"could mean ’every kind of species of fish’. And again we have a connection to the miraculous haul of 153 fishes. As explained on <a href='B:500 21:11'>Joh 21:11</a>, this was the number of species of fish which were then thought to exist. Every species of fish was caught in the net, with the incident clearly speaking of the universal appeal of the Gospel, saving some from all nations. The stress upon"exceeding many", also in :9, connects with the huge number of the seed of Abraham, the converts to the Gospel.</p>


text:
<p>But its muddy places and its marshes shall not be healed; they shall be given over to salt- This rings somewhat strangely if we insist this prophecy must have a fulfilment in the Kingdom of God on earth. See on :8. The idea is that not all would respond, even if the water of life came to them. For the marshes and muddy places were clearly reached by the water flowing from the temple.</p>


text:
<p>By the river on its banks, on this side and on that side, shall grow every tree for food whose leaf shall not wither, neither shall its fruit fail: it shall bear new fruit every month, because its waters issue out of the sanctuary; and its fruit shall be for food, and its leaf for healing- <a href='B:730 22:2'>Rev 22:2</a> interprets this in a clearly symbolic way with reference to the situation which will come about at the return of the Lord Jesus to Zion. Perhaps the trees with leaves that don’t wither are to be seen as representative of the righteous (<a href='B:240 11:30'>Pro 11:30</a>; <a href='B:230 1:3'>Psa 1:3</a>). Those who respond to the water of life will grow thereby to provide the fruit of the tree of life to others. And that is true in this life too, as <a href='B:240 11:30'>Pro 11:30</a>; <a href='B:230 1:3'>Psa 1:3</a> make clear.</p>


text:
<p>Thus says the Lord Yahweh: This shall be the border, by which you shall divide the land for inheritance according to the twelve tribes of Israel: Joseph shall have two portions- The latter chapters of Ezekiel stress how Israel were to “inherit” the land; yet the same word is used in other restoration prophecies, about Messiah causing Israel to “inherit” the land again after their return from “the north country” (<a href='B:450 2:12'>Zec 2:12</a>; <a href='B:450 8:12'>Zec 8:12</a>; <a href='B:290 49:8'>Isa 49:8</a>; <a href='B:300 3:18'>Jer 3:18</a>). When Judah returned from the “north country”, then Jerusalem would be the universally recognized “throne of the Lord” (<a href='B:300 3:17-18'>Jer 3:17-18</a>). The Kingdom could have come when Judah returned from Babylon. It was therefore potentially possible for the returning exiles to inherit all the land outlined in <a href='B:330 47:13-21'>Eze 47:13-21</a> and share it out between the 12 tribes. But they grabbed every man for himself, his own farmstead, his own mini-Kingdom. They had no interest in the wider vision, nor in subduing extra land; and the majority of the Jews didn’t even want to inherit it; they preferred the soft life of Babylon, the Kingdom of men rather than the Kingdom of God. And thus the Kingdom made possible was neveractually fulfilled at that time.</p>


text:
<p>You shall inherit it, one as well as another; for I swore to give it to your fathers: and this land shall fall to you for inheritance- This is the language of the tribal lots distributed under Joshua when the people first entered the land from the wilderness journey. It all has deep appropriacy to the giving of the land to the exiles now returning from Babylon, also involving a desert journey. All Judah were&nbsp; to inherit the land,"one as well as another"; whereas in reality at the restoration, Nehemiah 5 records how some grabbed the land of others. If the land was for an inheritance there could be the implication that those who were given it would die and then pass it on as an inheritance- again, appropriate to a restored kingdom at the time of the restoration, but not to the day of the eternal Kingdom of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>This shall be the border of the land: On the north side, from the great sea, by the road to Hethlon, to the entrance of Zedad- Numbers 34 and Joshua 15 had defined the land in the order south, west, north, and east. But there the order is north, east, south, west. Perhaps this was because in Joshua’s time Israel came from the south into the land; whereas now they were to return from the land of the north. We marvel at God’s sensitivity to our contexts and situations on earth. See on :17.</p>


text:
<p>Hamath, Berothah, Sibraim, which is between the border of Damascus and the border of Hamath; Hazer Hatticon, which is by the border of Hauran- The whole style of Ezekiel 40-48 would appear to be relevant to Ezekiel’s own time- note how the borders of the land are described as “Sibraim, which is between the border of Damascus… on the north northward is the border of Hamath” (:17). These geographical notes only made sense in Ezekiel’s time.</p>


text:
<p>The border from the sea, shall be from the sea to Hazar Enon at the border of Damascus; and on the north northward is the border of Hamath. This is the north side- There appears to be a double reference to the northern border; as explained on :15, perhaps this was because in Joshua’s time Israel came from the south into the land; whereas now they were to return from the land of the north. We marvel at God’s sensitivity to our contexts and situations on earth.</p>


text:
<p>The east side, between Hauran and Damascus and Gilead, and the land of Israel, shall be the Jordan; from the north border to the east sea you shall measure. This is the east side- The Jordan river was to be the eastern border. Yet the territory promised to Abraham extended to the Euphrates. God was making concessions to their weakness by giving them at this stage a more limited area. But the territory in Gilead east of the Jordan river was also envisaged as being possible for their possession (<a href='B:400 7:14'>Mic 7:14</a>; <a href='B:450 10:10'>Zec 10:10</a>). These varying definitions of the promised land are of themselves evidence that God’s purpose with His people is elastic. We can be sure that at the return of the Lord Jesus, the full territory promised to Abraham will be given to Israel, right up to the Euphrates; for God’s promise to Abraham shall surely be fulfilled. So this scenario here in Ezekiel 47 is not that of the future Kingdom after Christ’s return.</p>


text:
<p>The south side southward shall be from Tamar as far as the waters of Meriboth Kadesh, to the brook of Egypt, to the great sea. This is the south side southward- Tamar was apparently at the southern end of the Dead Sea. There would therefore be a diagonal line drawn from there to the"brook of Egypt". As noted on :18, this was a new definition of the promised land. It was intended for the time of the restoration, as in the full Messianic Kingdom, the entire territory promised to Abraham will be inherited.</p>


text:
<p>The west side shall be the great sea, from the south border as far as over against the entrance of Hamath. This is the west side- This is the Hamath of :17. This coastal area included the territory possessed by the Philistines which had always been problematic for Israel. It would’ve all seemed too incredible for the exiles to believe; that powerful localpeoples and the empire of Babylon and Persia would not get in the way of these promises being fulfilled. We too can look at present realities and baulk at the possibility of them all being swept away in order to fulfil the promises within the Gospel of the Kingdom. The Israel who returned instead focused on establishing their own farmsteads, getting a reasonable harvest, getting along with the local tribes, and a religion of external obedience, rather than seeing the huge possibilities open to them. We too face this same temptation.</p>


text:
<p>So you shall divide this land to you according to the tribes of Israel- Which were twelve tribes according to Ezekiel 48. The prophecies of the restoration envisaged both the ten tribes and Judah returning together. But most of them preferred to remain in the lands of their captivity.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen, that you shall divide it by lot for an inheritance to you and to the aliens who live among you, who shall father children among you; and they shall be to you as the native-born among the children of Israel; they shall have inheritance with you among the tribes of Israel- This would have been very hard for the exiles to accept. Ezra and Nehemiah document all the conflicts with the local people who"live among you". To give them a place in the new system would run counter to the core of Judah’s self perception. The idea of course was that these"aliens"would convert to the God of Israel and become joined to natural Israel as His covenant people. But instead the Jews despised them, later terming them ’Samaritans’, refusing to accept them; and initially intermarrying with them and accepting their gods.</p>


text:
<p>It shall happen, that in what tribe the foreigner lives, there you shall give him his inheritance, says the Lord Yahweh- The commandments about giving the Gentiles inheritance amongst the tribal cantons are understandable in the light of the fact that the Samaritans were living in the land at the time of the restoration. Even within Ezekiel, as well as in Malachi, Israel are criticized for oppressing the stranger / Gentile who lived with them (<a href='B:330 22:7'>Eze 22:7</a>; <a href='B:330 22:29'>Eze 22:29</a>); and now they are told that in the new temple system, the stranger must be generously given an inheritance in the land, he must be counted as actually belonging to one of the tribes. But the subsequent history of the returned exiles reveals their development of a xenophobic attitude to Gentiles.</p>


text:
<p>Now these are the names of the tribes: From the north end, beside the way of Hethlon to the entrance of Hamath, Hazar Enan at the border of Damascus, northward beside Hamath, (and they shall have their sides east and west)- The initial audience would have balked at the mention of Damascus. It would’ve seemed impossible to establish a new kingdom bordering on such a powerful city. These descriptions of the borders of the land and the inheritances were therefore a huge challenge to faith, just as the message of a future Kingdom is to us today, surrounded by the seemingly permanent and powerful structures of this world.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Dan, from the east side to the west side, Asher, one portion- By the time of Revelation, the tribe of Dan isn’t mentioned in <a href='B:730 7:5-8'>Rev 7:5-8</a>. But this was not the case at the time of the restoration. This is another reason to understand the entire potential scenario here as relevant to the restoration but not to the return of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Asher, from the east side even to the west side, Naphtali, one portion- The tribal allotments are all equal in size, and the borders as it were imagined as straight lines. But this would have been unworkable in practice due to issues of topography; greater definition was needed to enable this to be practically done. The implication is that had Israel repentantly returned and responded to the plans of Ezekiel 40-46, then more detail would have been given. This is exactly as stated in <a href='B:330 43:11'>Eze 43:11</a>.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Naphtali, from the east side to the west side, Manasseh, one portion- The inheritance of Manasseh east of the Jordan is now ignored, and in order to be given parallel swathes of territory, this would meant Naphtali giving some of its former territory to Manasseh.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Manasseh, from the east side to the west side, Ephraim, one portion- Ephraim as the largest tribe of the ten tribes is still given the same inheritance size. It could be that with the loss of the genealogical records at the destruction of the temple, the captives were not strongly aware of what tribe they came from. And so effectively a new Israel was being declared.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Ephraim, from the east side even to the west side, Reuben, one portion- The inheritance of Reuben east of the Jordan is now ignored; perhaps because effectively their separation there from the rest of Israel had not been to their spiritual good.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Reuben, from the east side to the west side, Judah, one portion- The exiles of Judah returning from Babylon would have expected a larger portion, but this was not to be. A new Israel was envisaged here. This division of the land between the tribes was designed to take away any sense of parochialism and superiority based upon previous history.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Judah, from the east side to the west side, shall be the district which you shall set apart, twenty-five thousand cubits in breadth, and in length as one of the portions, from the east side to the west side: and the sanctuary shall be in its midst- If the sanctuary was to be strictly in the midst of a swathe of land running from the Mediterranean to the Jordan River, then this position would not coincide with mount Zion. Perhaps this was intentional- to as it were relocate Zion, perhaps due to topographical changes God would have brought about. But"in its midst"need not be so literally interpretted. The Hebrew can as well be translated"within it".</p>


text:
<p>The district that you shall offer to Yahweh shall be twenty-five thousand in length, and ten thousand in breadth- The holy district had to be consciously ’offered’ to God by the tribes. This suggests that the scenario in this chapter is more command than prescription of what God would force to come about. <a href='B:330 45:1'>Eze 45:1</a> seems to envisage a ceremony at which the returned exiles formally divided up the land according to these borders and also offered the district to the Lord. But they never did this.</p>


text:
<h4>This holy district shall be for the priests: toward the north twenty-five thousand in length, and toward the west ten thousand in breadth, and toward the east ten thousand in breadth, and toward the south twenty-five thousand in length- This area was to be consciously given to the priests; see on :9. Hence LXX"Out of this shall be the first-fruits of the holy things to the priests".</h4><h4>And the sanctuary of Yahweh shall be in its midst- See on :8.</h4>


text:
<p>It shall be for the priests who are sanctified of the sons of Zadok, who have kept My instruction, who didn’t go astray when the children of Israel went astray, as the Levites went astray- But there is no record of the sons of Zadok keeping separate from the apostasy of the Levites in the time before the exile. We can conclude that they did have some faith, and this was counted to them for righteousness; hence"Zadok"means ’righteousness’. The sons of Zadok would sanctify others to work as priests, presumably because at the time of the restoration they were so few. Ezra struggled hard to get any Levites to return with him. And there is no evidence that the sons of Zadok ever did this at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>It shall be to them an offering from the offering of the land, a thing most holy, by the border of the Levites- GNB"So they are to have a special area next to the area belonging to the Levites, and it will be the holiest of all". Again we see the intentional usage of the language of"the holiest of all"used about areas other than the most holy place. The impression given is that holiness will abound, and not be confined to a tiny area of 9 square meters; <a href='B:450 14:20'>Zec 14:20</a> likewise speaks of holiness abounding in the restored temple system. As noted on :9, this area was to be consciously given to the sons of Zadok; hence LXX"And the first-fruits shall be given to them out of the first-fruits of the land, even a most holy portion from the borders of the Levites". But this simply wasn’t done at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>Opposite the border of the priests, the Levites shall have an area twenty-five thousand cubits in length, and ten thousand in breadth: the entire length shall be twenty-five thousand, and the breadth ten thousand- The division between sons of Zadok, priests sanctified by the sons of Zadok and Levites all seems to contradict the idea that the faithful are and will eternally be ’king-priests’ (see on <a href='B:730 5:10'>Rev 5:10</a>). We conclude therefore that this situation describes what could have happened at the restoration, and not in the future Kingdom of the Lord Jesus.</p>


text:
<p>They shall sell none of it, nor exchange it, nor shall the first fruits of the land be separated; for it is holy to Yahweh- The situation envisaged is where sale and exchange of land is possible, although the Levites must not do so; which hardly sounds appropriate to the Lord’s future Kingdom on earth. The original text is unclear regarding the"first fruits". The GNB offers:"none of it may be sold or exchanged or transferred to anyone else". The Levites were to be provided for, but did not own anything of themselves. And we in this age are to live in the spirit of priesthood (<a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a>).</p>


text:
<h4>The five thousand that are left in the breadth, in front of the twenty-five thousand, shall be for common use, for the city, for dwellings and for suburbs- Ezekiel had earlier explained that Judah went into captivity because the priests made no difference between the holy and the"common"(<a href='B:330 22:26'>Eze 22:26</a> s:w:). The restored system was to correct that and maintain the separation. But Malachi makes clear that they did not do so.</h4><h4>And the city shall be in its midst- See on :8. There could be here the implication that the exiles had a choice as to where to build the city. Perhaps a new Zion was in view.</h4>


text:
<p>These shall be its measures: the north side four thousand five hundred, and the south side four thousand five hundred, and on the east side four thousand five hundred, and the west side four thousand five hundred- The style here is alluded to in the description of the four square city of God in which there is no temple in <a href='B:730 21:13'>Rev 21:13</a>. The idea seems to be that the essence of these prophecies will come true in a spiritual and eternal sense, but without the literal temple system (<a href='B:730 21:22'>Rev 21:22</a>).</p>


text:
<p>The city shall have suburbs: toward the north two hundred and fifty, and toward the south two hundred and fifty, and toward the east two hundred and fifty, and toward the west two hundred and fifty- Whilst the Levites and sons of Zadok lived in the area around the sanctuary, it seems there were to be no other tribes living there. Judah, in whose territory Jerusalem previously stood, had a separate swathe of territory as an inheritance. To as it were lose Jerusalem would have been unattractive to the people of Judah who were in captivity hearing these words for the first time. See on :18.</p>


text:
<p>The remainder in the length, alongside the holy district, shall be ten thousand eastward, and ten thousand westward; and it shall be adjacent to the holy district; and its increase shall be for food to those who labour in the city- Revelation alludes to these prophecies, and effectively speaks of"the city"as being"the temple"(<a href='B:730 3:12'>Rev 3:12</a>; Revelation 21 cp. <a href='B:290 66:6'>Isa 66:6</a>)."Them that serve the city"could refer to the Levites, who were"to serve the tabernacle"(<a href='B:40 4:24'>Num 4:24</a>; <a href='B:40 4:26'>Num 4:26</a>; <a href='B:40 18:6'>Num 18:6</a>), which was now the temple / city. But the restored exiles considered that it was vain to serve God (<a href='B:460 3:14'>Mal 3:14</a>; <a href='B:460 3:18'>Mal 3:18</a>), and so this just didn’t come about at the restoration.</p>


text:
<p>Those who labour in the city, out of all the tribes of Israel, shall cultivate it- I suggested on :17,18 that nobody actually lives in the city; all the tribes have their inheritances elsewhere. The servants of the city may be the Levites. In this case we are to imagine them as under the Mosaic system, scattered throughout the tribes of Israel teaching there, and coming up by groups to work at the temple. One of their jobs will be to grow food for those working in the temple.</p>


text:
<p>The entire district shall be twenty-five thousand by twenty-five thousand: you shall offer the holy district foursquare, with the possession of the city- Again we note that the returned exiles were to consciously offer this area to God (<a href='B:330 45:1'>Eze 45:1</a>); see on :9.</p>


text:
<p>The residue shall be for the prince, on the one side and on the other of the holy offering and of the possession of the city; in front of the twenty-five thousand of the offering toward the east border, and westward in front of the twenty-five thousand toward the west border, answerable to the portions, it shall be for the prince: and the holy offering and the sanctuary of the house shall be in its midst- Had Judah repented at the time of the restoration, a Davidic ruler would have been raised up, Zerubbabel is the most obvious candidate (see on Zechariah 6). He would have reigned"for ever", for an age. But he dropped the baton, or at least Judah were unwilling for this scenario. And so the prophecies were reinterpreted and rescheduled for total and eternal fulfilment in the Lord Jesus."The prince"of the envisaged restored temple in Ezekiel 40-48 refers to this same individual. See on <a href='B:330 37:25'>Eze 37:25</a>.</p>


text:
<p>Moreover from the possession of the Levites, and from the possession of the city, being in the midst of that which is the prince’s, between the border of Judah and the border of Benjamin, it shall be for the prince- This is the territory which <a href='B:330 46:18'>Eze 46:18</a> says could be passed on by the prince to his sons for a lasting inheritance. But there is no legislation about how his sons could pass it on; over time, the area would have become endlessly subdivided between the prince’s descendants. This is one of the many practical issues which arise in studying these records, just as the division of the land into horizontal swathes along straight lines requires more definition in order to be practically done. As noted on <a href='B:330 43:11'>Eze 43:11</a>, had the returned exiles been obedient, then more details would have been given.</p>


text:
<p>As for the rest of the tribes: from the east side to the west side, Benjamin, one portion- <a href='B:50 33:12'>Deu 33:12</a> had stated that Benjamin would dwell close to Yahweh, and his portion is directly next to the sanctuary area. Jerusalem was originally situated on the border between Benjamin and Judah, although Judah took over Benjamin’s territory at that point and effectively Jerusalem was considered as within Judah. But now, the tribal allotments were such that Jerusalem clearly belonged to neither of them. Such petty squabbles were to be forgotten in the restored kingdom.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Benjamin, from the east side to the west side, Simeon, one portion- Simeon’s original territory was surrounded by Judah; now they were to be as it were given territory which was once Judah’s, and Judah was given&nbsp; an inheritance to the north of where they had previously inherited. This would have been hard to accept for the men of Judah to whom Ezekiel was preaching. But all sense of pride and clinging on to the once significant things of this life is to be subsumed in the realities of the restored Kingdom. And we can learn a lesson from that.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Simeon, from the east side to the west side, Issachar, one portion- Issachar had previously inherited to the far north of the land. Now they were in the far south. All we once held so dear is to be completely inverted in the inheritance prepared for us in God’s Kingdom.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Issachar, from the east side to the west side, Zebulun, one portion- Likewise Zebulun had previously inherited to the far north of the land. Now they were in the far south. Those who simply wanted to return to what they had once known were to be disappointed. See on :27.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Zebulun, from the east side to the west side, Gad, one portion- This area would have been desert, as was the area promised to Issachar. To achieve an equality and fairness in the distribution of territory, there must be the implication that the climate and even topography would be changed. The restoration prophesies are full of promises of abundant harvests and blessing upon the physical land. But unless they were believed, Zebulun would have considered that this was not a good deal, and that the good news of this new kingdom held nothing much for them. And so it is with us. The promise of the Kingdom is only meaningful and good news for us if we have the faith to believe that things shall radically change on this earth, and the promised Kingdom will not simply be a return to how we have known secular life in this world; the old and familiar, like the previous inheritance and homesteads of Gad before the exile, will not be returned to us. Something far better is in store.</p>


text:
<p>By the border of Gad, at the south side southward, the border shall be even from Tamar to the waters of Meribath Kadesh, to the brook of Egypt, to the great sea- Tamar was apparently at the southern end of the Dead Sea. There would therefore be a diagonal line drawn from there to the"brook of Egypt". As noted on <a href='B:330 47:18'>Eze 47:18</a>, this was a new definition of the promised land. It was intended for the time of the restoration, as in the full Messianic Kingdom, the entire territory promised to Abraham will be inherited.</p>


text:
<p>This is the land which you shall divide by lot to the tribes of Israel for inheritance, and these are their individual portions, says the Lord Yahweh- It was Ezekiel, as he sat with the exiles in Babylon, who was to divide the land by lot unto the various tribes. The tragedy of all the details recorded in Ezekiel 40-48, and the very reason for their being preserved to this day, is to show us to what great extent God has prepared potential things for His people, and yet they can be totally wasted if we don’t respond. In fact according to <a href='B:400 4:10'>Mic 4:10</a>, it was God’s purpose to exile His people to Babylon, “and there shalt thou be delivered; there the Lord shall redeem thee from the hand of thine enemies”. And yet they preferred to side with their enemies and to prefer non-deliverance from Babylon. The tragedy of it all is almost unthinkable, and yet this is what we do if day by day we chose the things of this world against the deliverance from this world which there is in Christ.</p>


text:
<p>These are the exits of the city: On the north side four thousand five hundred reeds by measure-"Exits"is literally ’goings out’, the word used of Israel’s going out from captivity in Egypt and Babylon. The association is in the fact that if they had truly gone out from Babylon, spiritually as well as literally, then this wonderful city would have been built.</p>


text:
<p>And the gates of the city shall be after the names of the tribes of Israel, three gates northward: the gate of Reuben, one; the gate of Judah, one; the gate of Levi, one- Nehemiah did his very best to bring the potential Kingdom of God about by urging the people to repentance and conformity to God’s will, such was his perception of what was going on; that the coming of God’s Kingdom was being limited by the apathy of his own people. See on <a href='B:330 40:10'>Eze 40:10</a>. He arranged for 12 gates to be built in the wall, as <a href='B:330 48:31-34'>Eze 48:31-34</a> had commanded there to be. The twelve gates with the names of the tribes of Israel are spoken of in <a href='B:730 21:12'>Rev 21:12</a>; but the language there is completely figurative. Seeing Judah had not built the city commanded in Ezekiel, it would as it were descend ready made from Heaven. But this is all figurative language. Seeing the literal fulfilment had been precluded by Judah’s disobedience, God would fulfil the essence of it in spiritual terms.</p>


text:
<p>At the east side four thousand five hundred reeds, and three gates: even the gate of Joseph, one; the gate of Benjamin, one; the gate of Dan, one- <a href='B:330 48:31-34'>Eze 48:31-34</a> envisaged the 12 gates of Jerusalem being named after the 12 tribes of Israel. But it seems no accident that twelve separate gates of the city are mentioned in the restoration record- but they weren’t renamed after the tribes of Israel. But the names of the city gates in Nehemiah were: valley (<a href='B:160 3:13'>Neh 3:13</a>); horse (<a href='B:160 3:28'>Neh 3:28</a>); east (<a href='B:160 3:29'>Neh 3:29</a>); Miphkad (<a href='B:160 3:31'>Neh 3:31</a>); water (<a href='B:160 8:16'>Neh 8:16</a>); dung (<a href='B:160 12:31'>Neh 12:31</a>); fountain (<a href='B:160 12:37'>Neh 12:37</a>); Ephraim, old, fish, sheep and prison gates (<a href='B:160 12:39'>Neh 12:39</a>). No wonder some wept when the rebuilt temple was finally dedicated- the pattern ofEzekiel’s vision hadn’t been followed, even on such basic matters as the names of the twelve gates of Jerusalem.</p>


text:
<p>At the south side four thousand five hundred reeds by measure, and three gates: the gate of Simeon, one; the gate of Issachar, one; the gate of Zebulun, one- The division of the tribes into four groups of three in a square formation recalls the cherubim visions of Ezekiel 1. The cherubim speak of the action of God on behalf of His people, and those who wished to could identify themselves with that work. The cherubim could have returned to Jerusalem and been manifested in the twelve tribes of a restored Israel. But this was precluded at the time by their disobedience and simple disinterest.</p>


text:
<p>At the west side four thousand five hundred reeds, with their three gates: the gate of Gad, one; the gate of Asher, one; the gate of Naphtali, one-&nbsp; There is no reason to think [contra Henry Sulley in The Temple of Ezekiel’s Prophecy] that there will be eleven gates on the West side. This is merely the fantasy of an architect.</p>


text:
<h4>It shall be eighteen thousand reeds around: and the name of the city from that day shall be, Yahweh is there- Jerusalem was to be renamed"Yahweh is our righteousness"(<a href='B:300 33:16'>Jer 33:16</a> RV)- <a href='B:330 48:35'>Eze 48:35</a> likewise is a command rather than a prediction, that the city should be called"Yahweh is there". The cherubim of glory would have returned; but as Zechariah makes clear, Judah had to return to God, not just physically returning to Judah and making the motions of worship, but in repentance. The idea that Jerusalem will become the city where “the Lord is there” must be connected with Ezekiel’s early use of the phrase to describe how the Lord “was there” in the land of Israel before the Babylonian invasion (<a href='B:330 35:10'>Eze 35:10</a>); all these details could have come true in Ezekiel’s time; but they did not. When they do so in the last days, the glory will visibly enter by the east gate in the person of the Lord Jesus. Using the prophetic perfect, God had prophesied that at the time of the restoration, He would come and dwell in rebuilt Zion (<a href='B:450 8:3'>Zec 8:3</a>)- just as Ezekiel’s prophecy had concluded: “The name of the city from that day shall be, The LORD is there” (<a href='B:330 48:35'>Eze 48:35</a>). Clearly, Ezekiel’s prophecies could have been fulfilled at the restoration; God was willing that they should be. But human apathy and self-interest stopped it from happening as it could have done:&nbsp;&nbsp;</h4><h4>They should have been more committed to building the temple “that I may appear in my glory” (<a href='B:440 1:8'>Hag 1:8</a> RSV). The glory of Yahweh as described at the end of Ezekiel could have appeared in Haggai’s time- but this wonderful possibility was held back by Israel’s petty minded, self-satisficing laziness.</h4>


text:
<p>In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon to Jerusalem, and besieged it- This means that Daniel would have been within the very first wave of captives taken into Babylon; he would have experienced the arrival of others over the next few years, all telling an increasingly bad story of the situation in Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar was not at this point"king", he was regent, although melech could apply to any such leader as he was at the time. This explains the possible chronological problem in Daniel 2.</p>


text:
<h4>The Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God- This is to be a theme in Daniel; that all such apparent disasters have God in control of them. The remainder of the vessels were taken in later waves of the invasion (<a href='B:120 24:13'>2Ki 24:13</a>; <a href='B:140 36:18'>2Ch 36:18</a>), confirming that Daniel was taken amongst the very first wave of captives (:1). Babylon’s original plan seemed to have been to make Judah a tributary state, taking away the leadership and seeking to make the youngsters like Daniel completely Babylonian, with a view to them returning and governing Judah. Hence only part of the vessels were initially taken. But this changed to a policy of complete destruction.</h4><h4>And he carried them into the land of Shinar to the house of his god: and he brought the vessels intothe treasure house of his god- The captives were paralleled with the temple treasures; they were taken into the temple as evidence that Yahweh and His people had now been apparently dominated. But Isaiah had prophesied that Bel would be rendered helpless and judged (<a href='B:290 46:1-2'>Isa 46:1-2</a>). The faithful captives would have remembered that, even when it seemed their chips were down.</h4>


text:
<p>The king spoke to Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring in some of the Israelites, those of the seed royal and of the nobles- This fulfilled the prophecy to Hezekiah:"Behold, the days come, that all that is in thine house, and that which thy fathers have laid up in store unto this day, shall be carried into Babylon: nothing shall be left, saith the Lord. And of thy sons that shall issue from thee, which thou shalt beget, shall they take away; and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon"(<a href='B:120 20:17-18'>2Ki 20:17-18</a>). This would mean that Daniel and his friends may well have been castrated. There is no mention of Daniel ever getting married or having children. So we are to imagine these young men looking forward to a rather bleak life; and they instead put their energy into devotion to their God and separation from the evil empire who has seeking to psychologically dominate them. So whilst Daniel’s devotion to Yahweh is to his credit, it is also psychologically understandable given this background. If Daniel and his friends were"of the seed royal", they would not have been ’well brought up’ in spiritual things. They would have seen the tragedy which occurred because attention had not been paid by their families to God’s word; and they were determined to do better. Josephus claims Daniel was in fact a son of Zedekiah.</p>


text:
<h4>Youths in whom was no blemish- The language of the sacrifices (<a href='B:30 22:19-21'>Lev 22:19-21</a>) and priests (<a href='B:30 21:16-24'>Lev 21:16-24</a>). These young men were to be trained up in the culture and religion of Babylon. There is a specifically spiritual aspect to the intention to educate them, so that the princes of Judah become princes of Babylon, with loyalty wholly to Babylon and her gods, and not Judah and Yahweh. There was therefore heavy pressure on these young men, with the intention of effectively brainwashing them into a totally different worldview, so that Judah would have no princes loyal to her any more.</h4><p>But handsome, well educated, knowledgeable- They were to be"wise", that is, made wise, in the wisdom of Babylon."The wise"in Daniel however are those who reject this and are wise in Yahweh’s ways (<a href='B:340 11:33'>Dan 11:33</a>; <a href='B:340 11:35'>Dan 11:35</a>; <a href='B:340 12:3'>Dan 12:3</a>; <a href='B:340 12:10'>Dan 12:10</a>).</p><h4>Understanding science, and such as had the ability to stand in the king’s palace; that he should teach them the learning and the language of the Chaldeans- There is an intended echo here of Moses’ experience in Egypt; situations repeat within and between the lives of God’s people, that we might learn from Biblical history and from the experiences of our brethren contemporary with us. Daniel and his friends surely saw and were inspired by the similarities with Moses. They would later see the similarities with Joseph.</h4>


text:
<p>The king appointed for them a daily portion of the king’s dainties, and of the wine which he drank, and that they should be trained for three years; that at its end they should stand before the king- The Persians and Babylonians typically trained such candidates intensely for three years from the age of 14. We can assume that this was the age of Daniel and his friends when they first made their stand for principle. Food and wine had religious significance. They were being made to participate in the king’s idolatry. For his table was seen as the table of the gods he worshipped. Right at the start of the book, we are introduced to the idea of a daily sacrifice- this pagan one mimicked the true daily sacrifice of the temple.</p>


text:
<p>Now among these were, of the Judeans, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah- All these names had the name of God in them, either as el or Yah. They were perhaps from amongst the minority influenced by Jeremiah’s attempted reformation on the eve of the Babylonian victory against Jerusalem. Or perhaps these were names they gave themselves, for Semitic peoples often are given or give themselves names appropriate to their belief system or life experience."Daniel"is ’God is judge’, the idea being that although Babylon had judged Jerusalem, God was the ultimate judge who had merely used Babylon and Babylon would be judged too."Hananiah"is"Whom Yah has favoured", and this word is used of how God would"favour"Judah with restoration (<a href='B:230 123:2-3'>Psa 123:2-3</a>; <a href='B:290 30:19'>Isa 30:19</a>; <a href='B:290 33:2'>Isa 33:2</a>; <a href='B:460 1:9'>Mal 1:9</a>)."Mishael"is from the two words misha [’who is like’] and el, ’God’:These same two words are used in the classic restoration prophecy of <a href='B:290 40:18'>Isa 40:18</a> and <a href='B:400 7:18'>Mic 7:18</a>, the idea being ’Who is like the God who restores Judah’. ’Who is like God!’ was the commentary upon God’s deliverance of Israel out of Egypt (<a href='B:20 15:11'>Exo 15:11</a>)."Azariah", ’help of Yah’, is likewise a term associated with God’s promise to"help"Judah in restoring them (s:w. <a href='B:290 41:13-14'>Isa 41:13-14</a>; <a href='B:290 44:2'>Isa 44:2</a>; <a href='B:290 49:8'>Isa 49:8</a>; <a href='B:290 50:7'>Isa 50:7</a>; <a href='B:290 50:9'>Isa 50:9</a>). So I suggest these young men chose their names in hope, in faith and in defiance of where they were being taken.</p>


text:
<h4>The prince of the eunuchs gave names to them: to Daniel he gave the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego- As noted on :6, the names of these young men all spoke of their faith and hope in the restoration of the Kingdom, and they may have chosen them in defiance of where they were being taken and the unashamed program of brainwashing they were now subject to. The names they were given were an intentional subversion of Yahweh worship."Belteshazar"is"Keeper of the hid treasures of Bel". The treasures of Yahweh’s temple had been transported to the temple of Bel in Babylon, and Daniel was likewise transported.</h4><p>"Shadrach"is"Filled with the spirit of the sun god". Hananiah was amongst those to be trained as Babylonian astrologers, and according to the Babylonian understanding, to do his job he would have to live up to his name, and be"Filled with the spirit of the sun god".</p><p>Mishael was tweaked to Meshach. The first syllable was retained, but el was replaced with Shak, the goddess of Babylon, also called Sheshach (<a href='B:300 25:26'>Jer 25:26</a>; <a href='B:300 51:41'>Jer 51:41</a>), which also means Venus, the goddess of love and mirth. But that goddess and the attempt to make Mishael into Meshach was subverted by the fact that it was during her feast that Cyrus took Babylon.</p><h4>Azariah became"Abednego","servant of Nebo", the god of wisdom, or"servant of the fire god". This was subverted wonderfully when Azariah was put in the fiery furnace, sacrificed to Nego, and yet survived thanks to Israel’s God. The psychological pressure consciously exerted upon these young believers was huge, and matches that which we all live under in this latter day Babylon</h4>


text:
<h4>But Daniel determined-"Determined"is the same word translated"gave the name to::."in :7. Babylon was determined to rename him, but he was determined not to give in to this brainwashing. He sets an example to all youngsters.</h4><p>Not to defile himself- Daniel is the more commendable in this because the other captives didn’t have the same sensitivity of conscience; and he is mentioned alone as the initiator in this refusal, with the three friends only coming in afterwards. The same word is used of how the later restored exiles did pollute themselves (<a href='B:460 1:7'>Mal 1:7</a>; <a href='B:460 1:12'>Mal 1:12</a>; <a href='B:150 2:62'>Ezr 2:62</a>; <a href='B:160 7:64'>Neh 7:64</a>). It is so much harder to take a stand for things when others amongst God’s people don’t do so.</p><h4>With the king’s dainties, nor with the wine which he drank: therefore he requested of the prince of the eunuchs that he might not defile himself- The objection was not so much because of unclean food or the nature of its preparation, but because Daniel perceived that eating meat offered to idols was purposefully intended by the Babylonians to make these young Jews effectively part of idol worship in every meal they ate. Paul’s reasoning in 1 Corinthians is based upon this; to partake in food knowingly offered to idols, when your eating was perceived as idol worship, was wrong."The king’s dainties"is better"the king’s portion of food", the food that had been placed upon the idolatrous table of the king; and it is used in <a href='B:340 11:26'>Dan 11:26</a> to describe those on the king’s side, his fellow worshippers.</h4>


text:
<p>Now God made Daniel to find kindness and compassion with the prince of the eunuchs- Finding chesed kindness and compassion was the language used of finding such mercy from God. But God had shown it to Daniel through the prince of the eunuchs:&nbsp; <a href='B:50 13:17'>Deu 13:17</a> had used the term in explaining that if none of the unclean things of the gentiles defiled God’s people, then Yahweh would show His people mercy and compassion. Daniel was not willing in his heart to be thus defiled, and so God showed him this promised"kindness and compassion". But how, mechanically, did it work out? We wonder if this man who was himself a eunuch may have been homosexually attracted to Daniel, who was a handsome young man and also a eunuch."Compassion"is AV"tender love". I am not suggesting that they had a homosexual affair, but possibly the prince of the eunuchs had a homosexual attraction to Daniel and did him a favour because of it. God works in all manner of ways to bring about His purpose and work in the lives of those faithful to Him. The Hebrew however has the idea of"pity", and is the word used in <a href='B:230 106:46'>Psa 106:46</a>:"He made them to be pitied of all those that carried them captives".</p>


text:
<p>The prince of the eunuchs said to Daniel, I fear my lord the king who has appointed your food and your drink: for why should he see your faces worse looking than the youths who are of your own age? Do you really want to endanger my head with the king?- We sense this man had indeed"tender love"(:9 AV) towards Daniel but naturally feared the consequences. We also have here a window into the despotic manner of Nebuchadnezzar, who beheaded his servants for the slightest perceived lack of obedience and servitude towards him. Daniel and his friends grew up as teenagers within the threat of instant death hanging over them. It seems the king personally had come up with this idea of making the young Jews eat and drink what had been offered to idols upon his personal table; he had a personal interest in breaking the culture of Yahweh worship which these youngsters had.</p>


text:
<p>Then Daniel said to the steward whom the prince of the eunuchs had appointed over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah- It seems Daniel didn’t respond directly to the prince of the eunuchs but to the steward, AV"Melzar". It seems those four had one"steward"responsible for them; with only four charges under his control, he would have observed them carefully and known them well.</p>


text:
<p>Test your servants, I beg you, for ten days; let them give us vegetables to eat, and water to drink-"Ten days"is elsewhere a period of testing (<a href='B:730 2:10'>Rev 2:10</a> etc:).</p>


text:
<p>Then let our faces be looked on before you, and the faces of the youths who eat of the king’s dainties; and as you see, deal with your servants-"Faces"or ’appearance’ is the word specifically used in Daniel of the"visions"about the ending of gentile power over Israel. The idea could be that this was a hint that&nbsp; those looking after them were invited to look upon the later visions and judge for themselves.</p>


text:
<p>So he listened to them in this matter, and proved them ten days- The Hebrew is literally ’He heard / obeyed them in this word’, the phrase so often used in appealing to people to hear God’s word. Those in charge of Daniel are presented as spiritually perceptive.</p>


text:
<p>At the end of ten days their faces appeared fairer, and they were fatter in flesh, than all the youths who ate of the king’s dainties- Or,"the king’s portion". There was a fair chance of word getting out about Daniel and his friends, but the men in charge of their feeding took that chance."Fair and fat"is the very Hebrew phrase used about the seven fat ears of corn in Pharaoh’s dream (<a href='B:10 41:5'>Gen 41:5</a>). There are so many echoes of the Joseph story in Daniel. We are to understand that it served as a Divine template for the situation Daniel found himself in; and our familiarity with God’s word coupled with sensitivity and self-examination enables us to discern such templates working out in our own lives."Zaphnath Paaneah", the name given to Joseph, can mean ’interpreter of dreams’; and Daniel’s interpreting the king’s dreams, at one stage being summoned out of obscurity to do so, is so clearly based upon Joseph’s experience. Man is not alone- in that no experience is without Biblical precedent, in essence. For other connections with Joseph, see on <a href='B:340 1:19'>Dan 1:19</a>.</p>


text:
<p>So the steward took away their dainties, and the wine that they should drink, and gave them vegetables- This was all the same a great risk, to disobey the king, and not give"the king’s portion"("dainties") when he had specifically stipulated it should be given them. The steward had sympathy for them.</p>


text:
<p>Now as for these four youths, God gave them knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom: and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams- The intention was that they should obtain such learning and wisdom from their education in the school of Babylonian mythology; interpretation of dreams was specifically connected with idolatry. Hence the emphasis that Israel’s God gave them wisdom. Daniel’s wisdom was proverbial throughout the empire (<a href='B:330 28:3'>Eze 28:3</a>). The language recalls how Bezaleel was"filled with the Spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge"(<a href='B:20 31:2-3'>Exo 31:2-3</a>) in order to build the tabernacle; these young men were given wisdom to effectively lead to the rebuilding of the temple. God is shown here to be able to operate directly on the human heart by His Spirit; and He can do so to this day (<a href='B:660 1:17'>Jas 1:17</a>; <a href='B:560 3:15-21'>Eph 3:15-21</a>). We don’t read here that Daniel and the four youths got wisdom from their own unaided Bible reading; rather, God gave them knowledge.</p>


text:
<p>At the end of the days which the king had appointed for bringing them in, the prince of the eunuchs brought them in before Nebuchadnezzar- The King wanted to see how far they had progressed out of the Yahweh cult, as he would have seen it, into the Babylonian mindset. The fact he was impressed with them was a result of the wisdom given to them and probably various providential situations which enabled them to answer his questions in an impressive way. <a href='B:340 2:1'>Dan 2:1</a> says that Daniel interpretted Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in his second year, so it’s possible that this examination ceremony was actually after that; chapter 2 is explaining, in the case, how the huge reputation of Daniel had been built up. However, the commentaries all give various suggestions about the chronological issues in Daniel and there are other apparently valid ways of understanding it.</p>


text:
<p>The king talked with them; and among them all was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: therefore they served the king- The other young Jewish men had comprised their faith in order to gain acceptance with the king; but their efforts somehow failed."They served the king"is literally ’they stood before [the face of] the king", and the same term is used of Pharaoh being brought before Pharaoh and his ’standing before [the face of]’ that king (<a href='B:10 41:46'>Gen 41:46</a>). As noted on <a href='B:340 1:15'>Dan 1:15</a>, this is another background allusion to Pharaoh which sets up the similarities with Joseph.</p>


text:
<p>In every matter of wisdom and understanding about which the king enquired of them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and enchanters who were in all his kingdom- They were not only better than the other Jewish youths, but ten times better than the existing Babylonian magicians. "Ten times" may connect with the ten days testing which they initially gave their steward (:14). Already the seeds of jealousy were sown; these young foreigners were found to be so far ahead of their teachers. It was thereby obvious that they had access to a wisdom far beyond that of their teachers.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel continued up to the first year of king Cyrus- This may refer to the length of Daniel’s uninterrupted court service. The first year of Cyrus was when the command was given to allow the Jewish exiles to return and rebuild the land. This isn’t necessarily when Daniel died, but the point is being made that he lived to see that significant moment. Some Jewish traditions claim Daniel returned to Judah at that time, but then went back to Babylon to die there.</p>


text:
<h4>PART I: Tales (chapters 1:1–6:29)</h4><p>1: Introduction (1:1–21 – set in the Babylonian era, written in Hebrew)</p><p>2: Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of four kingdoms (2:1–49 – Babylonian era; Aramaic)</p><p>3: The fiery furnace (3:1–30 – Babylonian era; Aramaic)</p><p>4: Nebuchadnezzar’s madness (3:31–4:34 – Babylonian era; Aramaic)</p><p>5: Belshazzar’s feast (5:1–6:1 – Babylonian era; Aramaic)</p><p>6: Daniel in the lions’ den (6:2–29 – Median era with mention of Persia; Aramaic)</p><p>PART II: Visions (chapters 7:1–12:13)</p><p>7: The beasts from the sea and the Son of Man (7:1–28 – Babylonian era: Aramaic)</p><p>8: The ram and the he-goat (8:1–27 – Babylonian era; Hebrew)</p><p>9: Interpretation of Jeremiah’s prophecy of the seventy weeks (9:1–27 – Median era; Hebrew)</p><p>10: The angel’s revelation: kings of the north and south (10:1–12:13 – Persian era, mention of Greek era; Hebrew)</p><p>Daniel chapter 2 contains an outline of the powers who were to dominate the people of Israel within the land of Israel; that is the eretz / earth / land which is in view, not the whole planet. It begins with a head of gold (Babylon), then breast and arms of silver (Persia), thighs of brass (Greece), two legs of iron (the two halves of the Roman empire) and then feet part of iron, part of clay. Each part of the image corresponds in proportion to how long each empire dominated the land of Israel and the Jewish people- thus the legs were longest because the Romans dominated the land for longest. After AD70, the Jewish state ceased to be a nation. But now, it is once again, for the first time in nearly 2000 years. The final part of the image therefore represents a group of nations (perhaps divided into two groups, symbolized by the two feet) who will dominate Israel in the last days. A stone cut out of a mountain without hands (representing the Lord Jesus Christ) then hits the image on its feet, growing into a mountain which fills the earth. The interpretation is given, and it clearly refers to the second coming of Christ to destroy the kingdoms of men who have dominated His land and His people, and to establish God’s Kingdom on earth: “In the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people; it shall crush to powder and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever” (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>). The vision requires that the image stands complete in order to all be destroyed together. The latter day entity represented by the feet will also be headed up by a latter day Nebuchadnezzar, and will comprise elements of all the previous entities which have dominated God’s people.</p><p>And yet there is another view possible. Bible prophecy is often conditional. At Daniel’s time, there was the possibility that in some sense, a Messiah figure could have appeared and re-established Israel as God’s Kingdom on earth. Many of the prophecies we understand as referring to the establishment of the Kingdom on earth at the Lord’s return could have then been fulfilled. Ezekiel 40-48 is the clearest example; the returning exiles were intended to build a temple of the dimensions given, replete with a Messiah figure. But most remained in the soft life of Babylon, and those who did return were disobedient to the Kingdom potential, as prophets like Malachi, Haggai and Zechariah make clear. Daniel’s prophecies likewise outlinea possible scenario which could have led to the re-establishment of the Kingdom; but it didn’t happen, because of men dropping the baton, missing the opportunities, refusing to use the potential of the Spirit.</p><p>Understanding Daniel 2 is programmatic to making sense of Bible prophecy about the last days. The beasts of Daniel 7 are clearly an extension and development of the four metals of the Daniel 2 image, and those beasts morph into the beasts of Revelation, where we find them presented with various aspects and with additional details. As to why the beasts morph over time, I would suggest that this is because Bible prophecy is conditional (see the Appendix ‘Conditional Prophecy in Daniel’). What could have come true e:g. in Daniel’s time, did not- because of the indolence of God’s people and the lack of repentance amongst the Gentiles. And so the prophecies morphed into another form, and then another, meaning that the essence of God’s prophetic word will still come true, even if the form of fulfilment is not that which was initially or ideally intended. Daniel 2-7 are written in Aramaic [Chaldee], not Hebrew. The section has a concentric structure, in which the visions of chapters 2 and 7 form the opening and concluding parts. They are clearly to be related to each other:</p><p>Daniel 2 - Vision of empires</p><p>Daniel 3 - Deliverance of three Jews from death</p><p>Daniel 4 - God’s discipline of the king</p><p>Daniel 5 - God’s discipline of the king</p><p>Daniel 6 - Deliverance of Daniel from death</p><p>Daniel 7 - Vision of empires</p><p>Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, was given a dream which Daniel interpreted. He saw an image comprised of various materials, in the form of a man. Nebuchadnezzar was the head of gold, followed by the breast and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, two legs of iron, and finally two feet [10 toes] made from a brittle mixture of iron and clay. A stone cut out from a mountain without hands then struck the image on its brittle feet, and destroyed the gold, silver, brass, iron and clay. A whirlwind carried them all away, and the stone grew into a mountain which filled the earth and will never pass away as the previous kings and kingdoms passed away. This is interpreted as the establishment of God’s eternal Kingdom on earth (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>). The stone is a fairly common symbol of the Lord Jesus Christ (<a href='B:230 118:22'>Psa 118:22</a> cp. <a href='B:470 21:42-44'>Mat 21:42-44</a>; <a href='B:510 4:11'>Act 4:11</a>; <a href='B:290 8:14'>Isa 8:14</a>; <a href='B:290 28:16'>Isa 28:16</a>; <a href='B:520 9:32-33'>Rom 9:32-33</a>; <a href='B:560 2:20'>Eph 2:20</a>; <a href='B:670 2:4'>1Pe 2:4</a>; <a href='B:670 2:6-8'>1Pe 2:6-8</a>), the Messiah of Israel (<a href='B:10 49:24'>Gen 49:24</a>; <a href='B:450 3:9'>Zec 3:9</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>; <a href='B:450 4:10'>Zec 4:10</a>), the begotten Son of God, cut out without human hands.</p><h4>Bible prophecy can be understood on a number of levels. It would be legitimate to see these four empires as referring to the succession of kingdoms which had dominion over “all the earth”. We must remember that the Bible was written in Hebrew, Greek and Chaldee. We read through the mask of translation. The Hebrew word and concept of eretz, translated “the earth”, can refer either to the whole planet, or specifically to the land promised to Abraham, between the Nile and the Euphrates. The word is used in modern Hebrew to refer to eretz Israel, the state of Israel. Clearly enough, the domination of “all the earth” (<a href='B:340 2:39'>Dan 2:39</a>) doesn’t mean the entire planet. It surely refers to domination of the land promised to Abraham, and the people of that land, i:e. Israel. Likewise Babylon is described as being ruler over “wherever the children of men dwell” because they had been “given into your hand” (<a href='B:340 2:38'>Dan 2:38</a>). This isn’t speaking of a literal dominion over every human being on the planet. The reference was to the way that Babylon had scattered the Jews amongst the various areas of the eretz [land promised to Abraham] under its control. The very same words for ‘give into the hand’ are used of how God would give the land and people of Judah / Israel “into the hand of” the king of Babylon (<a href='B:150 5:12'>Ezr 5:12</a>; <a href='B:230 106:41'>Psa 106:41</a>; <a href='B:300 20:4-5'>Jer 20:4-5</a>; <a href='B:300 22:25'>Jer 22:25</a>; <a href='B:300 32:3'>Jer 32:3</a>; <a href='B:300 32:28'>Jer 32:28</a>; <a href='B:300 34:2'>Jer 34:2</a>; <a href='B:300 34:20-21'>Jer 34:20-21</a>; <a href='B:300 44:30'>Jer 44:30</a>; <a href='B:330 16:39'>Eze 16:39</a>; <a href='B:330 39:23'>Eze 39:23</a>). Indeed, within the book of Daniel the point has been made; for the book opens with the statement that the king of Judah has been ‘given into the hand of’ the king of Babylon (<a href='B:340 1:2'>Dan 1:2</a>). This is all quite some emphasis- the people ‘given into the hand’ of Nebuchadnezzar do not refer to all people on the planet, rather are they specifically the Jewish people. Likewise, the earth / land which is in view isn’t the whole planet, but rather the land promised to Abraham. Note too that ‘the earth’ [eretz] is often understood as the people of Israel within their land. Thus: “Concerning Samaria and Jerusalem… hear, all you people; hear, O earth [eretz] and all that therein is” (<a href='B:400 1:2'>Mic 1:2</a>). Frequently, the physical land of Israel is addressed by the prophets, when clearly it is the people of the land which is in view. Ezekiel 6 is full of this: “Set your face toward the mountains of Israel, and prophesy against them, and say, You mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord GOD! Thus says the Lord GOD to the mountains and the hills, to the ravines and the valleys: Behold, I, even I, will bring a sword upon you, and I will destroy your high places:::&nbsp; I will cast down your slain before your idols… I will scatter your bones around your altars… your works wiped out… and you shall know that I am the LORD” (<a href='B:330 6:2-7'>Eze 6:2-7</a>). Therefore the domination of the land / eretz can be understood specifically as the domination of the people of Israel within that land. This would explain why there is an apparent gap in fulfilment of the Daniel 2, 7 visions- the historical fulfilment appears to stop once Rome was no longer dominating Israel, and then restarts in the very last days, in the period of the ten toes / horns. This would be because there was no land / state / people of Israel in their land to dominate.</h4><p>After Babylon’s domination of the land, there followed the Medo-Persian empire (breast and arms of silver), then the Greeks (belly and thighs of brass), followed by the Roman empire, divided as it was into Western and Eastern parts, symbolized by the two iron legs. Out of this arose the two feet with their ten toes. But after the Roman empire, the people of Israel were exiled from their land, only becoming a nation again in 1948. The two feet with their ten toes would then represent a brief period of mixed domination of the land, under a confederacy of ten groups broadly divided into two camps. I say ‘brief’ because in proportion to the size of the image, the feet are not very large. The proportions of the different parts of the body match the length of time over which the various empires dominated Israel. Thus Babylon dominated Judah for 70 years, and they are represented by the head, which is not a large part of the human body.</p><p>The prophecy of Daniel goes further to provide more details of this series of empires. Daniel 7 describes the same succession in terms of four beasts, which also represent the same empires as the metals in the image of Daniel chapter 2. The fourth beast has ten horns, corresponding to the ten toes of Daniel’s image; and out of them, one particular horn is prominent. This beast becomes the prototype for the beasts we encounter in the book of Revelation, who likewise dominate God’s people and will be destroyed by Christ’s return.</p><p>Radical Islam and the Land Promised to Abraham</p><p>Radical Islam has a lot to say about the land promised to Abraham- what the Bible prophecies refer to as the eretz or land / earth. Radical Islamist groups such as The Islamic State and al-Nusra Front have spoken much about it; their definition of the Levant or Sham is pretty much that of the land promised to Abraham. ‘Nusra’ is an acronym standing for the Front for the Defense of the Levant. They claim to be fighting to prepare the way for the coming of the Mahdi to establish God’s Kingdom worldwide; they call the land promised to Abraham “Land of Malahim,” or “epic battles”, and they expect there to be the al-Malhamah al-Kubra, the “Great Battle of the last hour”, at Jerusalem. This is what the Bible calls Armageddon. When the true Jesus appears in Jerusalem, all nations in the earth / land will be gathered together to battle at Jerusalem. And the jihadist theology is preparing them for this. They consciously speak of their caliphate as being extended over the land promised to Abraham, and they are urging people to leave their native lands as Abraham left his, and journey to live in the caliphate, comprised as they wish it to be, of the territory promised to Abraham. They call their caliph or leader ‘Caliph Ibrahim / Abraham’, and urge migration or hijrah to the land promised to him. The pieces are all falling into place to fulfil the Biblical pictures of the last days. Jihadist theology makes much of ‘signs of the times’, leading upto the coming of the Mahdi and the final battle against the antiChrist. These ‘signs of the times’ they look for are often the same signs which are to be found in the Bible, e:g. the re-establishment of Israel as a nation before Armageddon. So as they apparently come true, Islamists are the more convinced that antiChrist [who they call Dajjal and understand to be a Jew] is about to appear in Jerusalem, and they must fight him in the last great battle, in order to enable the Mahdi to return. Who they consider to be the antichrist will in fact be the true Christ. They will rush to fight Him, believing Him to be the antichrist they are expecting. Their destruction by Him will presage the establishment of God’s true Kingdom on earth, the revived and restored kingdom of Israel. This would explain why many Biblical terms used about the very last days are also found in Jihadist theology. They speak of the events of the very last days before the Mahdi returns as being “the hour”; and yet Revelation speaks of how the kings of the earth / land will have power for “one hour” and be destroyed likewise in “one hour” (<a href='B:730 17:12'>Rev 17:12</a>; <a href='B:730 18:10'>Rev 18:10</a>; <a href='B:730 18:17'>Rev 18:17</a>; <a href='B:730 18:19'>Rev 18:19</a>). These similarities are unsurprising because Mohammed clearly plagiarized the Bible and Judaism for his teachings.</p><p>The changing of times and laws by the antichrist figure of <a href='B:340 7:25'>Dan 7:25</a> sounds like the radical Islamist desire to impose the Islamic calendar and sharia law in the land promised to Abraham, which they see as their caliphate; and for sure, if Israel becomes part of an Islamic state, then the keeping of the Jewish calendar will be outlawed. The implementation of sharia law and changing legal structures to reflect it, is a major theme in their program. It’s clear that the three and a half year domination of Jerusalem and changing of the Jewish law and calendar had an initial fulfilment in the abuses of Antiochus Epiphanes, who desecrated the temple. There was a three and a half year period from the edict of Antiochus in June 168 BC to the rededication of the temple in December 165 BC:&nbsp; The little horn of Daniel 8 comes out of the Greek kingdom, but the horn of Daniel 7 out of the fourth kingdom. I suggest that this is because the prophecy could have been fulfilled totally at the time of Antiochus- Messiah could have come and destroyed him. But the various required preconditions weren’t met, and so there was another possibility of it coming true out of the Roman kingdom [another possibility is that the four beasts and metals refer to Babylon-Media-Persia-Greece rather than Babylon-Medo Persia-Greece-Rome]. Revelation uses the same imagery to describe the antiChrist of the last days, who will incorporate some elements of the previous historical fulfilments of the little horn in men like Antiochus Epiphanes.</p><p>Issue number 3 of the Islamic State magazine Dabiq frequently talks of the call to follow Ibrahim [Abraham] in making hijrah [migration] to the land promised to him: “Islam in the end of times will be more manifest in Shâm::. So the best of the people on the earth in the end of times will be those who keep to the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah, which is Shâm” [Majmû’ul-Fatâwâ]. Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullâh) also said, “So he informed that the best of the people on the earth are those who keep to the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah, in contrast to those who pass through it or leave it. The land that Ibrâhîm made hijrah to is Shâm::. the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah::. And the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah, has been made for us equal to the land of our Prophet’s hijrah. The best people on earth will be those who keep to the land of Ibrâhîm’s hijrah”. Note how the theology of these jihadists effectively replaces the land of Saudi Arabia and the city of Mecca with that of the Levant, the territory promised to Abraham; and Mecca is replaced in their focus by Jerusalem. With Saudi Arabia now supporting the Western coalition against radical Islam, such a shift in emphasis isn’t surprising. But it means that all is being prepared for the last days- for the Bible prophecies focus upon the domination of the land of Israel and Jerusalem in particular. It’s significant that the Caliph of the Islamic State Caliphate is referred to by his followers as Caliph Ibrahim / Abraham; the idea is that the faithful will follow him in migrating from their homelands to the land promised to him- which is the very same eretz which is the focus of the Bible’s latter day prophecies, and which is to be dominated by an antiChrist figure and his beast.</p><h4>&nbsp;The Image Stands Complete in the Last Days</h4><p>The image of Daniel 2 must stand complete in the last days- the whole image, not just the toes, are to be broken in pieces “together”. This feature of the prophecy is crucial to correct interpretation. Babylon, the head of gold, must therefore rule over the system which the image represents. The image is a man- let’s not forget that. The head is Nebuchadnezzar. The entity which will be destroyed by the Lord’s coming is therefore headed up in an individual; and there are other Bible themes and specific predictions which flesh out the picture of this anti-Christ of the last days.</p><p>According to the interpretation given inDan 2:38-40, the first kingdom (Babylon) was destroyed by the second (Medo-Persia), and the second was destroyed by the third (Greece); but we read that the iron (Roman) kingdom would break in pieces all the previous empires, not just the Greek empire: “iron breaks in pieces and subdues all [these]; and as iron that crushes all these, shall it break in pieces and crush them” (<a href='B:340 2:40'>Dan 2:40</a>). This was achieved in the sense that there were elements of the Babylonian and Medo-Persian empires in the Greek empire which Rome crushed; as Keil puts it in his commentary, “the materials of the first two kingdoms were comprehended in the third”. And likewise there are elements of the iron in the last part of the image- for the feet are made of iron mixed with clay. On this basis we can conclude that the final part of the image, the feet of iron and clay, will incorporate elements of all the previous empires which dominated Israel.</p><p>Apart from the head of gold, all the metals / beasts have a strange feature in common- they subdue three previous powers. The second beast has three ribs in its mouth` (<a href='B:340 7:5'>Dan 7:5</a>)- speaking of three powers subdued by the Persians. The third entity, Greece, subdued “three… even four” kings of Persia (<a href='B:340 11:2'>Dan 11:2</a>). I suggest this is a Semitism which effectively means ‘three very great ones’- cp. “for three transgressions and for four” in Amos 1, “three things… even four” (<a href='B:240 30:15'>Pro 30:15</a>; <a href='B:240 30:18'>Pro 30:18</a>; <a href='B:240 30:21'>Pro 30:21</a>; <a href='B:240 30:29'>Pro 30:29</a>). The fourth entity, the legs of iron (Daniel 2) and the terrible fourth beast (Daniel 7) devoured, broke in pieces and stamped upon the remnants of the preceding three beasts / powers (<a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a>). The little horn roots up three of the ten horns [cp. the ten toes], meaning that “he shall subdue three kings” (<a href='B:340 7:24'>Dan 7:24</a>). Clearly the final phase of the kingdoms of men will include this feature which was in all the preceding ones. We should look, therefore, for a system which subdues three other kings or kingdoms.</p><p>If you tried to build a replica of the image seen by Nebuchadnezzar, with human dimensions and the same metals, it would not stand up. The relative gravity of the materials is such that it would be pulled over by the weight of its head. Gold has a specific gravity of 19:6, and the other materials have progressively lower gravities- clay has only 1:8 [silver 11, brass 8:5, and iron7:8]. Specific gravity refers in layman’s terms to the tendency of the material to fall to the ground. The whole image is pulled down to the earth by the weight of the head of gold. The specific individual heading it up therefore has an overpowering effect upon the whole entity. This of itself indicates not only how fragile are the Kingdoms of men, but how a specific individual, the latter day head of gold, will bring the image down. The whole colossus of humanity is actually kept standing by God- because the image as it is described could not stand. God is in history, He was and ever shall be and will bring it all down at the appointed time. This of itself is great comfort, as we feel dwarfed by the seeming inexorability of historical event and the apparent colossus of human corporation and empire.</p><p>Some of the words used about the behaviours of the elements of the image are elsewhere used specifically about the persecution of Israel. Nebuchadnezzar, and indeed the other empires, are described as ’ruling’ over the earth / land (<a href='B:340 2:38'>Dan 2:38</a> etc:), but the equivalent Hebrew word is used specifically about how the enemies of the Jews sought to rule over the Jewish people. The word is used of how Haman the Agagite [the man of Gog] sought to "have power over" [s:w:] the Jews (<a href='B:190 9:1'>Est 9:1</a>). Likewise, the word used for how the iron would ’subdue’ (<a href='B:340 2:40'>Dan 2:40</a>) is only used elsewhere of how the Israelites were subdued or ’made feeble’ by their Egyptian persecutors (<a href='B:50 25:18'>Deu 25:18</a>). The iron would "break" all beneath it, and this word is used of Esau [forefather of the Arab Moslem peoples] ’hurting’ Jacob (<a href='B:10 31:7'>Gen 31:7</a>), the Egyptians breaking Israel in Egypt (<a href='B:20 5:22-23'>Exo 5:22-23</a>; <a href='B:40 20:15'>Num 20:15</a>; <a href='B:50 26:6'>Deu 26:6</a>), the Assyrians ’breaking down’ the land of Judah (<a href='B:290 24:19'>Isa 24:19</a>) and the Babylonians breaking down Jerusalem (<a href='B:300 25:29'>Jer 25:29</a>; <a href='B:300 31:28'>Jer 31:28</a>). God’s Kingdom will "consume all those kingdoms" (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>), using the same word as used about the ’consuming’ of all things upon the land of Israel, both Gentile dominators and the apostate within Israel (<a href='B:430 1:2-3'>Zep 1:2-3</a>).</p><p>So much of God’s prophetic word had some initial fulfilment and relevance to its first audience. But always we are left with the sense that the fulfilment was only partial. The prophecies of Israel’s restoration from Babylon did indeed have a fulfilment in the return of the exiles, as did those of Babylon’s judgments, but clearly the major and complete fulfilment is yet to come. And thus it will be in the last days and in the return of Christ to earth that the entire prophetic word has its complete fulfilment. The word will take on the full flesh of reality in a way it has never done previously. The fulfilments and applications of Revelation’s prophecies about the beast over history are but a prelude to that which is yet to come. We are seriously mistaken if we think that because we can discern a historical application of these prophetic words, therefore there is no future fulfilment. The schema of the image in Daniel 2 visually demonstrates this; the sequence of empires which can be discerned is not the main fulfilment of the prophecy. Rather is the ultimate and main fulfilment in the way that the image stands complete in the last days and is destroyed by Christ’s return to earth. Likewise all the beasts exist at the coming of Christ (<a href='B:340 7:12'>Dan 7:12</a>). The arising of four beasts from the sea doesn’t mean they had to arise at different times; they are a parody of the four beasts representing God’s Angelic organization. John describes these in <a href='B:730 4:7'>Rev 4:7</a>; clearly he saw them all at the same time: “The first creature was like a lion, the second creature like a calf, the third creature had the face of a man and the fourth creature was like a flying eagle”. Because the continuous historical application is true as far as it goes doesn’t preclude the main fulfilment of the prophecy in a rather different way in the very last days. And thus the book of Revelation too can have discernible historical applications over history, but throughout the book there is the strong impression that the prophecies speak of situations immediately before Christ’s return, appeals and judgments which are urgently poured out immediately prior to ’the end’- and in that sense He is spoken of as coming "soon" (<a href='B:730 2:16'>Rev 2:16</a>; <a href='B:730 3:11'>Rev 3:11</a>; <a href='B:730 22:7'>Rev 22:7</a>; <a href='B:730 22:12'>Rev 22:12</a>; <a href='B:730 22:20'>Rev 22:20</a>), in that the ultimate message of the book is for the generation who will be alive at the Lord’s coming.</p><p>The complete image will have elements within it of the previous entities who dominated God’s people in their land. But it’s also possible that for the image to stand erect there will be four entities dominating the eretz, represented by the four beasts and four metals, with one of them sprouting ten toes / horns and an antichrist figure. This scenario would explain how after the fourth beast is destroyed the other three beasts have their dominion taken away (<a href='B:340 7:11-12'>Dan 7:11-12</a>).</p><p>The Head of Gold</p><p>Nebuchadnezzar was given a kingdom of power, strength and glory (<a href='B:340 2:37'>Dan 2:37</a> LXX). Biblically, this is God’s Kingdom, which at that time was Israel. The animals and birds given into his hand (<a href='B:340 2:38'>Dan 2:38</a>) surely refer to those of the land promised to Abraham, rather than literally the whole planet. For in what sense were the birds of the Amazon or Australian kangaroos given into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar? The phrase ‘beasts of the field and birds of Heaven’ is repeatedly used to represent the ‘wild’ nations living in eretz Israel, from the Euphrates to Egypt. It is they who were at one time protected by the great empires and then turned against them (<a href='B:330 29:5'>Eze 29:5</a>; <a href='B:330 31:6'>Eze 31:6</a>; <a href='B:330 31:13'>Eze 31:13</a>; <a href='B:330 32:4'>Eze 32:4</a>); they are used as symbolic of the nations in the invasion of <a href='B:330 38:20'>Eze 38:20</a>, and of Israel’s neighbouring enemies (<a href='B:230 79:2'>Psa 79:2</a>; <a href='B:350 2:18'>Hos 2:18</a>). It was these which were given into Nebuchadnezzar’s hand; and later in Daniel we read that the birds and beasts represent the nations dominated by Babylon (<a href='B:340 4:2'>Dan 4:2</a>; <a href='B:340 4:21'>Dan 4:21</a>). Clearly Nebuchadnezzar’s dominion was not global, and I submit that the only other clearly definable domain for ‘the entire earth’ is the earth / land promised to Abraham. God is said to have ‘given’ the beasts and birds ‘into the hand’ of Nebuchadnezzar. This exact phrase is used of how God gave the people of Israel into his hand (<a href='B:150 5:12'>Ezr 5:12</a>). It is so often stated that God would give His people into Babylon’s hand (<a href='B:300 20:4-5'>Jer 20:4-5</a>; <a href='B:300 22:25'>Jer 22:25</a>; <a href='B:300 32:3'>Jer 32:3</a>; <a href='B:300 32:28'>Jer 32:28</a>; <a href='B:300 34:2'>Jer 34:2</a>; <a href='B:300 34:21'>Jer 34:21</a>). Clearly it is the Jewish people in their land who are in view. As Babylon reigned over them as the head of gold, so the succeeding empires likewise would reign over them, and the entire image would stand therefore upon the land and people of Israel in the last days. Nebuchadnezzar was “made ruler over all”; but the “all” requires definition. I suggest it means all the eretz promised to Abraham, and all God’s people within it. The same word is used of how the Persians wished to ruler over / have power over God’s people (<a href='B:190 9:1'>Est 9:1</a>). The ‘all the earth’ over which these kings / kingdoms had power (<a href='B:340 2:39'>Dan 2:39</a>) is not referring to the entire planet, but specifically to the land promised to Abraham and God’s people within it.</p><h4>The whole intention of the vision was to "make known to the king what shall be in the latter days" (<a href='B:340 2:28'>Dan 2:28</a>). Now that of course can simply mean ’in the future’ ("hereafter", <a href='B:340 2:29'>Dan 2:29</a>). But "the latter days" is a term often used in the Bible regarding ’the last days’- the period directly prior to the return of Christ to earth. So we are invited to see the entire prophecy of the image standing complete and&nbsp;being broken as speaking of events to happen directly prior to the Lord’s return. This requires the image to stand complete, and for the entire prophecy to have a primarily latter day fulfilment. The form of the entire image was "terrible" (<a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>), and this is the language of the last beast which would exist at the time of Christ’s return (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a> s:w:). That beast, which is the basis of the beasts we meet in Revelation, is a summary of all the components of the image:&nbsp; The stone cut out without hands (<a href='B:340 2:34'>Dan 2:34</a>) must be connected with the way in which the antiChrist figure of the very last days will stand up against the Prince of Princes [Christ] and be broken "without hand" (<a href='B:340 8:25'>Dan 8:25</a>), just as the stone quarried without hands would ’break’ the entire image. The individual of <a href='B:340 8:25'>Dan 8:25</a> is therefore the embodiment of the entire image of Daniel 2; the entity represented by the image will be incarnated in its individual leader, who will exist at the very time of theLord’s coming. And the language of <a href='B:340 8:25'>Dan 8:25</a> is clearly picked up in the prophecy of the "man of sin" in 2 Thessalonians 2, who will challenge the Lord Jesus and be destroyed by the brightness of His second coming.</h4><p>The Feet of Iron and Clay</p><p>The ten toes are split into two groups, represented by the two legs. This could refer to the deep division between Sunni & Shia Islam, or to the latter day entity having two foundations within the land of Israel- in the West Bank, and in the Gaza Strip. Imagine the image standing with its two legs standing on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with Jerusalem in the middle; if the image is facing East, it would be looking precisely towards Mecca, as if it is an observant Moslem. Or it could be that there will be ten leaders, or ten groups, within the land promised to Abraham. Another consideration is that the "emirate" of a future Islamic entity is headed by a caliph and his "cabinet" of ten "ministers.</p><p>The cementing together of the iron and clay recalls the words of the Koran in Surah 61:4:"Truly Allah loves those who fight in His Cause in battle array, as if they were a solid cemented structure". And yet the prophecy requires that they will be mixed together, but will not cleave with each other. And this will be the basis of their destruction, just as the disunity between Israel’s historical enemies was the basis of their destruction. <a href='B:230 60:8'>Psa 60:8</a>; <a href='B:230 108:9'>Psa 108:9</a> predict that God will triumph over Philistia- literally, He will split, divide them. But their own internal divisions are effectively their own judgment. And this is how God so often works.</p><p>The military arm of Hamas is the Qassam Brigades; kassam in Arabic means ‘divider’, another allusion to the feet part of iron and part of clay, when the Kingdom of Israel’s oppressors shall be “divided” (<a href='B:340 2:41'>Dan 2:41</a>). Hamas means ‘strong’, and the Gaza strip / Hamas controlled area will be part of the final strong / weak, iron / clay entity that briefly dominates the land according to Daniel 2. The uniting of the disparate elements in the ten toes is matched by the great emphasis in the Moslem world upon unity. We read of “King Hussein’s plan for the establishment of a so-called United Arab Kingdom” (Y. Harkabi, The Palestinian Covenant And Its Meaning (Totowa, N:J: Valentine, Mitchell & Co:, 1979) p:135). This sounds exactly like the ‘uniting’ of the iron and clay in the entity of the last days which will dominate Israel. “The Palestinian National Authority will strive to achieve a union of the confrontation countries [i:e. “all nations around about” Israel- D:H:]… or a step along the road to comprehensive Arab unity” – Political Programs of the P:L:O:, Article 8. “The Arab ‘nation’ is made up of ‘peoples’ and the (one) Arab homeland comprises the national homeland of these peoples… the relationship of the people and the individual to the overall Arab homeland and nation is called in modern Arabic Qamwiyya (nationalism)… like the trunk of a tree that branches off into offshoots of local patriotism…the splitting up of the Arab region into separate states carved out by the colonial powers:&nbsp; However, once Arab unity is achieved and the frontiers wiped out…” (Y. Harkabi, The Palestinian Covenant And Its Meaning (Totowa, N:J: Valentine, Mitchell & Co:, 1979) p. 31).</p><p>There is a gap in historical fulfilment between the end of the iron legs, the Roman empire, and the brief time of the iron and clay [the feet are a small proportion of the image of a man]. This need not concern us unduly. It could be that this is because there was no nation dominating Israel in the land promised to Abraham, because the Jews were in dispersion from Roman times until the 20th century revival of the state of Israel. This period may be what Jesus had in mind when He spoke about “the times of the Gentiles” (<a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a>). Or it may be that indeed the prophecy had a possible fulfilment in the first century, or even earlier, that didn’t happen- and so the fulfilment was delayed, resulting in this apparent gap in fulfilment. We encounter a similar gap at the end of Daniel 11, when the fulfilment jumps from the time of the Greek empire to the last days; likewise Daniel 8 makes the very same jump. And the 70 weeks prophecy in Daniel 9 seems to require a similar jump from the time of Jesus to the last days. Another possibility is that the entire thrust of the Daniel 2 prophecy is indeed, as Daniel said, to show what shall be in the last days. The fulfilment over history is not exact and is only a dim primary fulfilment of the vision.</p><p>Muslim Unity and Disunity</p><p>The entire image with all its component metals is"broken to pieces together"by the little stone (<a href='B:340 2:35'>Dan 2:35</a>). The Chaldee word translated"together"is the equivalent of the Hebrew echad, one. The various metals, along with the feet or iron and clay, may not naturally cleave to each other and yet in another sense they are one. And this is exactly the scenario we see developing- bitter intra-Islamic rivalry, whilst united passionately. The only commonality they all have is their joint hatred of Israel and desire to destroy the Jewish people and dominate their land. The same word is found, almost untranslated, in <a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>, where we read that the king saw a great image. The"a"translates the same original word which is translated"together"in :35. The image was not just ’an’ image, but a together, united image,"one"image. The different metals were united together in one form and person, as a consciousimitation of Nebuchadnezzar and ultimately, Mohammad, whom the IS and the jihadists claim to embody. Remember article 8 of the Hamas Covenant:"Allah is its target, the Prophet is its model”. Recall too that the IS developed out of the Tawhid wa al-Jihadi group, meaning ’Unity & Jihad’. Unity is such a major and recurrent theme in the founding documents of so many jihadist groups, not least the IS [ISIS] and Hamas.</p><p>The ‘Palestinians’ were historically destroyed not by Israel but by the king of the north: “Howl, gate! Cry, city! You are melted away, Philistia, all of you; for smoke comes out of the north, and there is no straggler in his ranks” (<a href='B:290 14:31'>Isa 14:31</a>). Historically, God seems to prefer to provoke division and confusion amongst Israel’s enemies so that they turn on themselves and self-destruct. The horns hate the whore riding the beast, and there are many other hints at such a scenario in the last days. The King of the North, a re-formed Babylon, or Assyria redivivus, will likely end up conflicting with Hamas, or the final rulers of Gaza, and likewise destroying them.</p><p>Intermarriage of the Clay and Iron?</p><p>But Biblically, the potters clay is Israel. They and the Arabs do not mix with each other. The strong iron, fragments and elements of the iron legs, the fourth beast system, will be mixed with them but they will not cleave to each other. Hamas / Gaza, the strong ones [‘Hamas’ and ‘Gaza’ both mean ‘strong’], will be mixed with a weak remnant of Israel within the land- and the whole entity will be destroyed by the Lord’s coming. Iron and clay don’t cleave or marry to each other (<a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>). The same word for "cleave" is used about marriage in <a href='B:10 2:24'>Gen 2:24</a>. They are mixed with each other- and the Hebrew and Chaldee words arab are used here. Clay is a symbol for Israel (<a href='B:290 64:8'>Isa 64:8</a>; <a href='B:300 18:6'>Jer 18:6</a>). The Jeremiah 18 reference is significant in that God says that Israel are as clay and He will break them in pieces because they didn’t respond to His appeals. The very same image is used of the destruction of the feet of clay in Daniel 2. The clay is specifically "potter’s clay" (<a href='B:340 2:41'>Dan 2:41</a>). And that is really the key to the interpretation, because Jeremiah 18 speaks of Israel as the clay in the hands of the Divine potter. The iron in the toes is clearly to be connected with the iron of the legs, which corresponds to the terrible fourth beast with iron teeth (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a>). The dominators of Israel in the last days will seek to cleave [in marriage] to the clay, Israel. The clay is called "the seed of men" (<a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>), recalling the descriptions of Israel as "the seed of the Jews" (<a href='B:190 6:13'>Est 6:13</a>). Mingling with the men of the seed would certainly suggest marriage. Is this a reference to a future Islamic domination of Israel unsuccessfully forcing the remaining Jews to marry Moslems? The iron and clay are "mixed" with each other; and the same word is used in <a href='B:150 9:2'>Ezr 9:2</a> of how the people of Judah "mingled themselves" in marriage to the peoples of the land. The suggestion is that the iron and clay ’marry’ but do not cleave to each other in that relationship. This is a feature of radical Islamist domination of territories. In Tunisia and other areas brought under Moslem domination, the Jews there were either killed or, if they were women, forced to marry (polygamously) Moslem men. It would not be out of character with the IS if those they conquer [Israel in particular] were given the same choice.</p><h4>Religious Hypocrisy</h4><p>The image is clearly presented as an idol- this is how the word translated "image" is usually used in the Old Testament. The chief deity of Babylon was Marduk who was considered to be the “god of gold”. Herodotus described the image of Marduk as a golden statue seated upon a golden throne before a golden table and a golden altar. Pliny also notes that the robes of Marduk’s priests were interlaced with gold. The word used for the breaking in pieces of the image (<a href='B:340 2:34'>Dan 2:34</a>) is that used frequently about the breaking in pieces of idols (<a href='B:20 32:20'>Exo 32:20</a>; <a href='B:50 9:21'>Deu 9:21</a>; <a href='B:120 23:6'>2Ki 23:6</a>; <a href='B:120 23:15'>2Ki 23:15</a>; 2Ch 344):&nbsp; The sequence of metals (gold, silver, brass and iron) is found again in <a href='B:340 5:4'>Dan 5:4</a>; <a href='B:340 5:23'>Dan 5:23</a> in describing the materials used by the Babylonian kings for their idols. It’s as if they wanted to show that actually all the metals of the image were comprehended within their empire- and they would last for ever. The latter day entity will be distinctly religious, too. The IS, as Sunni Moslems, are passionately against any idols or memorials, hence their destruction of any Shia shrines they take control of. But in a turn of irony which can only be Divine, their religious system is of itself an idol, which is to be destroyed by the Lord’s second coming. The entity represented by the image of Daniel 2, which I suggest refers to an Islamic state established in the land promised to Abraham, is destroyed by the return of Christ as of a stone cut out without hands. But the Kaaba stone, the black stone of Mecca which is the central point of the grand mosque in Mecca towards which Moslems pray, is believed by Moslems to have been cut out without human hands and to have come to earth from Heaven, and will reappear at judgment day (Hava Lazarus-Yafeh Some Religious Aspects of Islam (Leiden: Brill, 1981) pp:&nbsp;120–124). And yet this stone, which serves as the focal point of Islam, will be shown to be but a parody of the ultimately true stone cut without hands, the Lord Jesus, who will return from Heaven as the stone to smash the image.</p><p>We can likewise observe that the description of the beast in Revelation 17 is very un-Islamic- in fact, the very opposite. The beast is ridden by a prostitute who is drunk- both abominations to radical Islam. The woman has a golden cup- drinking from golden cups is specifically forbidden to Moslems by the Quran. The cup is full of idolatry- and Sunni Islam particularly is passionately against any idolatry or worship of anything apart from God. An image is set up to the beast and worshipped- also abomination for Moslems. The false prophet does miracles- whereas Moslems claim that Mohammed did no miracles and the Quran itself is the one supreme miracle of Islam. The gawdy decoration of the beast and whore of Revelation 17 is far from the sobriety of jihadist Islam. Why the apparent contradictions? The similarities with what Islam is not are so pronounced that a point is surely being made. The beast of Revelation is how God views the Islamic State and radical Islam. From His perspective, they are the very and exact opposite of all they are claiming. And as has often been observed, the supposed ’religion of peace’ is responsible for huge destruction and mass murder. Another possibility is that the more opulent descriptions of the beast actually match well with the Islamic conception of Paradise- as defined, e:g:, in the Encyclopedia of Islam (Article ’Jannah’): "One day in paradise is considered equal to a thousand years on earth. Palaces are made from bricks of gold, silver, pearls, among other things. Traditions also note the presence of horses and camels of"dazzling whiteness", along with other creatures. Large trees are described, mountains made of musk, between which rivers flow in valleys of pearl and ruby". It may be that the radical Islam will seek to portray their caliphate as paradise come on earth.</p><p>The Destruction of the Image</p><p>The ’breaking in pieces’ of the colossus is described using the same word as is used about how Israel will break in pieces their latter day enemies (<a href='B:290 41:15'>Isa 41:15</a>; <a href='B:400 4:13'>Mic 4:13</a>). Whilst God ultimately will do this, it may be that He uses the tiny, ragged, repentant remnant of natural Israel to do so in the last days, achieving the most humanly unlikely, David versus Goliath victory of all human history. For it is God’s style to always work through some human mechanism in achieving His judgments. The destruction of the nations will be as the wind blowing away the chaff from the threshing floors at harvest time (<a href='B:340 2:35'>Dan 2:35</a>). But God usually works through a mechanism. It is a repentant Israel who will be Yahweh’s threshing instrument and who will trample their enemies to pieces and destroy them as chaff (<a href='B:290 41:15'>Isa 41:15</a>; <a href='B:400 4:13'>Mic 4:13</a> - very much the language of the destruction of the image in Daniel 2). Thus again we have the picture of the tiny, now faithful remnant of Israel being mightily used by the Lord to destroy their oppressors. And yet unbelieving Israel are described as chaff (<a href='B:290 5:24'>Isa 5:24</a>; <a href='B:290 33:11'>Isa 33:11</a>; <a href='B:300 23:28'>Jer 23:28</a>; <a href='B:350 13:3'>Hos 13:3</a>; <a href='B:430 2:2'>Zep 2:2</a>). Those Jews who come into covenant with the oppressors will be treated as them and share their judgment, just as those who do not come out of Babylon will share in her plagues, and the unfaithful Christian believers will be "condemned with the world" (<a href='B:530 11:32'>1Co 11:32</a>). The work of the Elijah ministry will culminate in the Lord Jesus appearing on earth in order to destroy the chaff (<a href='B:470 3:12'>Mat 3:12</a>). So we can infer that the work of the Elijah prophet in appealing for Israel’s repentance occurs at the same time as Israel’s domination by the oppressors. For both activities culminate in the Lord Jesus destroying the chaff.</p><p>The image of threshing definitely connects with other prophecies describing the judgment process at the Lord’s second coming as being a threshing. <a href='B:400 4:11-12'>Mic 4:11-12</a> predict that the nations will be gathered against Jerusalem in order that they may be threshed there. Jerusalem has been the attraction for these peoples- nd Islam so strongly desires it. Those are threshed are the ten toes of the image of Daniel 2, the 10 horns of the beast of Daniel 7. These therefore represent nations who desire to take Jerusalem. It is Babylon who will be threshed in the last day (<a href='B:300 51:33'>Jer 51:33</a>), so we can understand these collected together nations as all under the control of Babylon. Which is what the image requires, because it was what Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon effectively saw as it were in the mirror, it was him, with his face. <a href='B:360 3:2'>Joe 3:2</a>; <a href='B:360 3:12'>Joe 3:12</a> envisages these nations being gathered into the valley of Jehoshaphat as a result of a holy / sanctified war which they have declared, a jihad (<a href='B:360 3:9'>Joe 3:9</a>), where God will first plead with them to repent (<a href='B:360 3:2'>Joe 3:2</a>) and then judge them at the harvest (<a href='B:360 3:12-13'>Joe 3:12-13</a>). The Joel 3 passage is developed in more detail in Revelation 16, where we read that once the Angels restraining the forces of evil at the Euphrates release them, the kings of the East will come charging towards God’s people. And the hordes of Islamic fundamentalists are currently gathered at the Euphrates river. But this will in reality be a gathering of them together unto Armageddon, meaning a heap of sheaves in a valley. Still within this same metaphor, Daniel 2 describes the threshing process, resulting in the wind blowing away the ground up peoples like chaff.</p><p>The image of a nation being threshed into dust is used in <a href='B:120 13:7'>2Ki 13:7</a> of how the Syrians did this to an apostate Israel- inviting us to see the feet of iron and clay as having at least some reference to Israel. "The precious sons of Zion" are likened to potters’ clay being smashed by the Babylonian invasion (<a href='B:310 4:2'>Lam 4:2</a>); and the toes are of potters’ clay (<a href='B:340 2:41'>Dan 2:41</a>). The imagery suggests the destruction of an apostate Israel by a latter day Syrian / Babylonian. The stone which does the destruction is the Lord Jesus, but it is He working through the enemies of Israel to do this, just as God did so many times in judging His people historically.</p><p>Conditional Prophecy in Daniel</p><p>The Olivet prophecy quotes and alludes to various parts of Daniel’s prophecy, and yet the Olivet prophecy’s intended fulfilment in AD70 didn’t happen as was potentially possible, and was rescheduled. This therefore implies that Daniel’s prophecies, which are alluded to, are thereby capable of a similar more elastic fulfilment. And looking in more detail at Daniel, this does indeed seem to be the case. Daniel prophesied whilst Judah were in captivity, and the prophecies of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel are full of potential prophecies of how the Messianic Kingdom could have been established at Judah’s return after 70 years in Babylon. Ezekiel’s conditional prophecy of the temple system is a parade example, although this was more commandment than prediction. I have discussed this in great detail in The Exiles. I suggest that like the Olivet prophecy, the prophecies of Daniel were an outline of a potential schema of events that could have taken place, leading up to the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom. But due to Judah’s overall preference to remain in Babylon, and the lethargy of those who did return, that schema was rescheduled and was given a longer term application over history, culminating in the events of [our?] last days and the final, inexorable establishment of the Messianic Kingdom on earth.</p><p>As is well established, Daniel’s prophecies are interrelated. The metals of the opening vision in Daniel 2 develop into the beasts of Daniel 7, and the other prophecies give more details of potential fulfilments and developments of the beast systems, culminating in the war between the Kings of the North and South and the final revelation of Israel’s triumphant Messiah and the resurrection in Daniel 12. The sequence of metals in the image of Daniel 2 speak primarily of four kings, each having a king-dom, a dominion over which they reigned. And they all form part of the image of an individual man. Nebuchadnezzar personally, rather than the Babylonian empire, was represented by the head of gold (<a href='B:340 2:38'>Dan 2:38</a>). The ten toes of the image represent “kings” (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a> “in the days of these kings”). The prophecy started to be fulfilled- for in Daniel’s lifetime, the head of gold, Nebuchadnezzar’s dynasty, gave way to Darius the Mede (<a href='B:340 5:31'>Dan 5:31</a>), and still in Daniel’s lifetime, to Cyrus the Persian (<a href='B:340 6:28'>Dan 6:28</a> <a href='B:340 5:31'>Dan 5:31</a>). Daniel immediately perceived that it was about a succession of kings, not kingdoms (<a href='B:340 2:21'>Dan 2:21</a>). But even that sequence need not have happened the way it did if Nebuchadnezzar had repented more quickly; if he had, there would have been a “lengthening of your tranquility” (<a href='B:340 4:27'>Dan 4:27</a>). If he had, perhaps the next metal of the image would have followed him directly, rather than following his son. The time period intended for him could have been changed. The same word translated “lengthening” occurs only again in <a href='B:340 7:12'>Dan 7:12</a>, where we read that the beasts had their “lives prolonged for a season and time”. Their intended time periods were added to. The setting up of God’s Kingdom on the earth / land of Israel was exactly what had been prophesied in Jeremiah and Ezekiel as happening once the captivity in Babylon had ended; at that time, the stone could have hit the earth and destroyed the situation envisaged in the image of Daniel 2. But this intended sequence of four kings followed by ten kings didn’t come about as intended. Ezra lamented the intermarriage of the Jews with the surrounding peoples, but even that could have been the fulfilment of the iron and clay mingling themselves with the seed of men (<a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>); but still the Kingdom was not established. The attempted reforms of Ezra and Nehemiah and the prophets Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi didn’t bear enough fruit; and the potential Messiah figures such as Joshua and Zerubbabel all failed.</p><h4>The captivity was intended to last for 70 years, but in reality it lasted longer- hence Daniel’s confusion and pleading with God in Daniel 10 to do what He had promised. And yet his prayer of Daniel 9 suggests that he realized Judah’s sins were such, and their lack of real repentance in Babylon was such, that the restoration program had been delayed. His response to understanding the 70 year period is to pray to God admitting Israel have sinned and are still impenitent- as if he realized this was why the period had been extended (<a href='B:340 9:2-3'>Dan 9:2-3</a>). In <a href='B:340 9:19'>Dan 9:19</a> he asks for God to forgive, to accept his repentance on Judah’s behalf, and therefore not to “defer” or delay any longer. Clearly he saw that the intended 70 year period had been extended, because Israel had not repented as required. It seems to me that this was the same reason for the ‘delay’ in Christ’s second coming; the bridegroom does indeed “delay”, the same word translated “tarried” (<a href='B:470 24:48'>Mat 24:48</a>; <a href='B:470 25:5'>Mat 25:5</a>). It didn’t happen in the first century as planned but was delayed, just as the coming of the Messianic Kingdom was delayed in Old Testament times.</h4><p>The beasts of Daniel 7 are based upon the four metals of the image in Daniel 2, with the feet and ten toes of iron and clay matched by the horns upon the fourth beast. The first beast was given a man’s heart and stood up looking like a man, showing it represented a personal king (<a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>). <a href='B:340 7:9'>Dan 7:9</a> speaks of how “the thrones were cast down” and then the last judgment sat. The beasts are therefore kings or “thrones”; their casting down is the same as the smashing of the metals of the image. My point is that the beasts were initially intended to be seen as kings, individuals rather than empires. <a href='B:340 7:17'>Dan 7:17</a> is clear: “These great beasts, which are four, are four kings which shall arise out of the earth / land”. Likewise “the ten horns… are ten kings” (<a href='B:340 7:24'>Dan 7:24</a>). We are so familiar with the rescheduled, long term application of the prophecies, rolling through the empires of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome, that we can overlook the simple fact that the intended fulfilment was in a swift succession of kings after Nebuchadnezzar which would conclude with the return from exile and the establishment of the Messianic Kingdom upon the ruins of the Babylonian kings. When it became clear that there would be some delay, Daniel was given the vision of Daniel 8, in which another version of the horns on the fourth beast was given. In this vision, a ram with a great horn spawned four leaders, out of whom came another horn, which persecuted Israel and defiled the sanctuary for 2,300 days, placing the desolating abomination (<a href='B:340 8:13'>Dan 8:13</a>). This time period has now obvious fulfilment. But this very verse is quoted by the Lord Jesus in the Olivet prophecy; and clearly it has the capacity for various potential fulfilments which can be rescheduled if human repentance and response is inadequate. <a href='B:340 8:20-22'>Dan 8:20-22</a> says that the two horns on the goat represented the kings of Media and Persia- both of whom Daniel served under (<a href='B:340 5:31'>Dan 5:31</a>; <a href='B:340 6:28'>Dan 6:28</a>). After them, four kings could have arisen, followed by a charismatic leader who would conflict with “the prince of princes” [Messiah] and be “broken without hand” (<a href='B:340 8:25'>Dan 8:25</a>) just as the little stone cut out without hands would destroy the image of Daniel 2. Such a situation could have happened in Daniel’s time, or at least in the time of Alexander the Great. But it didn’t. Firstly, in Daniel 2, he saw a succession of four kings. But then, after the second king, he has a vision of another four kings needing to arise; in other words, another element has been added to the sequence, delaying the fulfilment somewhat. Daniel’s response was feeling depressed (<a href='B:340 8:27'>Dan 8:27</a>)- because obviously he wanted the fulfilment assoon as possible.</p><p>In Daniel 9, Daniel pleads for the prophecy of restoration to be fulfilled, recognizing that the 70 year period had been extended; he is recorded as repenting on behalf of Judah, and asking that God will not further delay the fulfilment (<a href='B:340 9:19'>Dan 9:19</a>). The answer is the prophecy of the 70 weeks. This could mean that 70 weeks were going to be added to the 70 years. This could have meant a literal 70 weeks from the time of Daniel’s prayer, or the seventy sevens could be a total of 490 day / years. Despite many ingenious attempts, there is no persuasive interpretation of the 70 weeks prophecy. It could be that it is a series of potential possibilities; seven literal weeks from the commandment to restore Jerusalem unto Messiah, and then 62 weeks from Messiah’s coming to His ‘cutting off’. But then the prophecy speaks of how the city and sanctuary would again be destroyed and the destroyer then himself destroyed. This would’ve been most discouraging for Daniel, who was expecting and hoping for the immediate restitution of the temple.</p><p>Then in Daniel 10, Daniel was told that the appointed time had been made longer (<a href='B:340 10:1'>Dan 10:1</a> Heb:). This was in the third year of Cyrus, when according to the earlier prophecies, Daniel was looking for a new king to arise (Daniel 2), or four kings (according to the sequence of Daniel 8). Seeing Daniel had lived through the reigns of at least three kings, he likely expected the reign of these kings to be very brief, so that he might see the coming of the restored Kingdom. But now he is told that the time period has been extended. No wonder Daniel mourned this vision for three weeks (<a href='B:340 10:2'>Dan 10:2</a>). Daniel then symbolically dies and resurrects; the comfort being that he would ultimately be resurrected to the life eternal, but the sadness being that he must die because “the vision [i:e. its fulfilment] is still for many days” (<a href='B:340 10:14'>Dan 10:14</a>). His praying and weeping for those three weeks had not brought about a reverting of the time period back to that originally planned- it was yet or still for many days. In the spirit of Moses, Daniel had tried to change God’s will. All we learn at least from this is that prophetic time periods are open to change. The Olivet prophecy speaks of how “the days”, and the context suggests the ‘days’ of Daniel’s prophecies were in view, will have to be shortened otherwise even the elect will fall away (<a href='B:470 24:22'>Mat 24:22</a>). <a href='B:340 11:2'>Dan 11:2</a> went on to explain to Daniel that now another series of four kings was envisaged, this time all Persian kings, in contrast to the idea of four Greek kings arising in Daniel 8; and this would culminate in two leading kings, of the North and South, who would have a series of conflicts climaxing in the temple being captured again, and conflict with Messiah leading to the resurrection (<a href='B:340 11:40'>Dan 11:40</a> to <a href='B:340 12:2'>Dan 12:2</a>). This scenario also didn’t happen- and it would explain why no very credible interpretation has been found for Daniel 11. When we read allusions to these prophecies in the Olivet prophecy, and perceive that the Lord had in mind fulfilling them in the first century but later rescheduled that, we must remember that those prophecies had already had various potential fulfilments which had not worked out because of the lack of repentance within Israel. This is the all important sign of fruit on the fig tree, and an encouragement to give highest priority to preaching to Israel.</p><h4>Daniel’s response is to ask “How long to the end of these things?” (<a href='B:340 12:8'>Dan 12:8</a> Heb:). He’s given various time periods of days, but told that these do not concern him, for he is to fall asleep in death, and then stand again “at the end of the days” (<a href='B:340 12:13'>Dan 12:13</a>), however many they were, whether shortened or extended, “the end” would come all the same, and he would be resurrected then. And this is the great comfort to all of us as we reflect whether we will live to see the Lord’s coming or not.</h4><h4><a href='B:340 2:1'>Dan 2:1</a></h4><p>In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar-&nbsp; The miserable critics point out that Daniel and his friends were tried for three years by Nebuchadnezzar when he was apparently already king (<a href='B:340 1:18-19'>Dan 1:18-19</a>). In a book as subtle and carefully internally coherent as the Bible, it beggars belief that such an obvious mistake would be made by some conman author. I suggest the opposite is true; someone who was writing the truth and who had lived close to the situation would write things which may appear contradictory to those reading from a distance. The four Gospel records are another example. And so here, at the time of Daniel 1 Nebuchadnezzar ruled as regent or subordinate to his father, Nabopolassar; whereas "the second year" refers to Nebuchadnezzar’s sole sovereignty. <a href='B:300 25:1'>Jer 25:1</a> likewise uses the idea of "the first year" of Nebuchadnezzar to refer to the first year of his sole reign. Or we can go with the alternative textual readings, which offer "the twelfth" for "the second year". Another option is to understand Daniel 1 as summarizing how Daniel and his friends came to be so highly acceptable to Nebuchadnezzar after three years; and the events ofchapter 2 explain how that came about. This kind of literary device is common in the Bible.</p><h4>Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams; and his spirit was troubled, and his sleep went from him- There are so many similarities with the young, handsome, captive, faithful Joseph interpreting Pharaoh’s dreams and getting rewarded; here the connection is with <a href='B:10 41:8'>Gen 41:8</a>.</h4>


text:
<h4>Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the enchanters, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, to tell the king his dreams- Babylon was deeply religious; the real leaders were the religious leaders, and the sorcery for which Babylon was infamous was a large part of their religion. Hence "the Chaldeans" refers to Babylonians generally, as well as to this class of religious leaders. They were the quintessence of all Babylon was. For them to be exposed as fraudulent failures was therefore a blow to Babylon’s entire religious structure, just as the dreams of Pharaoh and later the plagues struck at the very core of Egypt’s religious beliefs.</h4><h4>So they came in and stood before the king- Perhaps in the middle of the night; see on :3.</h4>


text:
<p>The king said to them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit is troubled to know the dream- The implication of :1 could be that the king couldn’t get back to sleep, and so he called the magicians immediately, at night. It could even be that the king commanded them to be killed immediately (see on :5), and the executioner then went to the house of Daniel to kill him too. But that same night Daniel went to the king (:16) and assured him that he would find the interpretation; he returns to pray, goes to sleep [despite all the pressure and drama], and in a night vision, perhaps later that very same night, receives the answer (:19). If something like this scenario is correct, then time was of the essence. Daniel would have wanted an immediate answer from God; but he had to exercise faith in going to the king and asking for time for the answer to come. And he went to see the king that night knowing that he had a death penalty upon his head. The heads of his department [as it were] had just been condemned to death; and he the very junior underling now goes to the king to ask for more time. Then he comes home, chats with his friends and prayers with them about the matter and goes to sleep in peace; and that night, he gets a vision which is the answer. This is all typical of the deep faith and peace which we sense in Daniel.</p>


text:
<p>Then the Chaldeans spoke to the king in the Syrian language, O king, live forever: tell your servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation- The group are summarized as "the Chaldeans". As noted on :2, "the Chaldeans" refers to Babylonians generally, as well as to this class of religious leaders. They were the quintessence of all Babylon was. For them to be exposed as fraudulent failures was therefore a blow to Babylon’s entire religious structure, just as the dreams of Pharaoh and later the plagues struck at the very core of Egypt’s religious beliefs. That they spoke in Syrian may seem unsurprising, but perhaps the idea is that as this part of Daniel is written in Aramaic ["Syrian"], we are reading the very words they actually spoke.</p>


text:
<h4>The king answered the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me- It’s unclear whether "the thing" refers to the dream, which had gone from him in the sense of forgetting it, "the thing" is the same word translated "matter" in :8,23; or whether the reference is to the decree which he intended sending out to kill the Chaldeans unless they recalled his dream for him and interpretted it. The same word for "thing" is translated "commandment" in <a href='B:340 3:22'>Dan 3:22</a>; <a href='B:340 3:28'>Dan 3:28</a> when the king again commands the death of his wise men. I suggest that if the reconstruction of events offered on :3 is correct, then "the thing" refers to the command to kill the wise men unless the dream was retold an interpreted. The reasoning in :8 confirms this.</h4><h4>If you don’t make known to me the dream and its interpretation, you shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a compost heap- The cutting in pieces is to be connected with how the stone was to break the image in pieces, including the head of gold which represented Nebuchadnezzar. He was to be taught that it was not for him to arrogate to himself such power of condemnation. For contrary to what he liked to imagine, he was not eternal, nor was he God. Rather, he was under Divine judgment.</h4>


text:
<p>But if you show the dream and its interpretation, you shall receive from me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore show me the dream and its interpretation- This is the language of a man who considers that he has the power to give any reward in his kingdom, which he considered to be the kingdom of a divine being, of God. The gifts and rewards given to Daniel were of political power within the kingdom. "Receive" is elsewhere used in Daniel of receiving the kingdom; and yet ultimately it is the people of God who would receive or "take" the Kingdom (<a href='B:340 7:18'>Dan 7:18</a> s:w:). "Great honour" is the word elsewhere translated "glory"; it was this glory which was so prideful and which led to Nebuchadnezzar’s downfall (<a href='B:340 4:30'>Dan 4:30</a>; <a href='B:340 4:36'>Dan 4:36</a>). The glory of the Kingdom was to be finally given for ever to God’s people (<a href='B:340 7:14'>Dan 7:14</a> s:w:). So it was precisely the attitude Nebuchadnezzar had at this point, considering that all reward and glory in the Kingdom of God was his to distribute at will, which had to be taken away from him. He was playing God, and this is so unacceptable to Him.</p>


text:
<p>They answered the second time and said, Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation- Their humanity is being taught to both them and the king. The idea was that they had special dialogue with the gods which others didn’t have, and therefore could give interpretations. But their limitations are apparent; it was God’s attempt to teach all of them, and the king, that their religion was woefully weak and they should accept the one true God. The whole scene here parallels Joseph before Pharaoh, and that was also the intention then. We marvel that God would make such effort to convert the likes of Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar, the very types we would have passed over and ignored as unsuitable candidates for any evangelism attempt.</p>


text:
<p>The king answered, I know of a certainty that you would gain time, because you see the thing is gone from me- The king is suspicious that they were not who they claimed to be, because they could not tell him what he had dreamt. The thing that went from him sounds like the command to kill them (see on :3,5). The king’s sensitivity to any appeal for extra time therefore made Daniel’s approach to request just that all the harder and more dangerous; although :16 could suggest Daniel as it were booked an appointment with the king, whilst as yet he had no answer. He was so sure that prayer would be answered and he would have an answer to give.</p>


text:
<h4>But if you don’t tell me the dream, there is but one law for you; for you have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, until the time be changed- The magicians had presumably come out with some airy words and were begging for more time, in the hope that the death penalty would be lifted. "Words" is the same word as "matter" in :10; perhaps they had come up with some dream which was not the word or matter which the king had dreamed. But Nebuchadnezzar had to be taught that God alone can ’change the times’; Daniel uses the same phrase in :21. The lives of the magicians were held in his hand as if playthings; but he was to learn that his life was in God’s hand in just the same way. It was God through His people who could change the king’s word of command (<a href='B:340 3:28'>Dan 3:28</a>), which was supposedly unchangeable.</h4><h4>Therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that you can show me its interpretation- He perceives that the dream and its interpretation cannot be separated; the magicians were making a difference between the two, but the king was not going to be fooled. If they truly had Divine powers, then they would know what he had dreamed.</h4>


text:
<p>The Chaldeans answered before the king and said, There is not a man on the earth who can show the king’s matter, because no king, lord or ruler has asked such a thing of any magician, enchanter or Chaldean- By saying this they were admitting that they were merely men upon earth. They reasoned that there was no historical precedent for such a request. And yet they were setting themselves up to have to make an exception to all their received wisdom; the one true God could inspire one man upon the earth, and show the matter.</p>


text:
<p>It is an unusual thing that the king requires, and there is no other who can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh- They were admitting that they were not in fact in contact with the gods, although this was what their profession was supposedly all about. And they were setting up an acceptance that therefore Daniel was God manifest in flesh.</p>


text:
<p>Therefore the king was angry and very furious, and he commanded that all the wise men of Babylon be destroyed- As noted on :11, they had effectively admitted that they had no connection with the gods; they were fakes, and may as well be fired from their jobs and "destroyed". The same word is used of how the power of destruction is ultimately with God alone (<a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>; <a href='B:340 7:26'>Dan 7:26</a>). Again, the king is portrayed as playing God, and being educated as to his error.</p>


text:
<p>So the decree went forth that all the wise men were to be slain; and they sought Daniel and his companions to be slain- I suggested on :3 that this all happened the same night. Perhaps the more prominent wise men were indeed slain, leaving their posts open for Daniel and his friends to replace them.</p>


text:
<p>Then Daniel returned answer with counsel and prudence to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, who was gone forth to kill the wise men of Babylon- We imagine Arioch coming to Daniel, sword in hand. "Arioch" may well be a title for the court executioner.</p>


text:
<p>He answered Arioch the king’s captain, Why is the decree so urgent from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel- As suggested on :3, this may have been very late at night.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would appoint him a time, and he would show the king the interpretation- The king had made it clear that there was to be no playing for time. If they were indeed in contact with the gods, he expected an immediate answer. But Daniel asks for time because he has to contact the one true God and wait for an answer. But it could be that although Daniel had not received any revelation at this point, he was certain he would; and he made the appointment to see the king in absolute faith that it would be given to him. Again we sense the calmness and faith of Daniel, reasoning as if what he did not then have, he effectively did have. See on :25.</p>


text:
<p>Then Daniel went to his house, and told Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions- As suggested on :3, this was in the middle of the night. "Companions" suggests those he was joined to, through sharing covenant relationship with Yahweh. Perhaps there were no others amongst the young exiles whom he felt were abiding in the covenant. As noted on :30, this is why Daniel later says that the dream was revealed to him simply so that he and his three friends might be saved from death at that time.</p>


text:
<p>That they would desire mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret; so that Daniel and his companions should not die with the rest of the wise men of Babylon- Daniel realized that his own prayers might not be enough, and so he awoke his friends late at night (see on :3) with the request that they join in prayer about the matter "Mercies" is better "pity". Their motivation was admittedly to save their own skins.</p>


text:
<p>Then was the secret revealed to Daniel in a vision of the night. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven- Effectively, Daniel dreamed the same as Nebuchadnezzar did, making him effectively equal to the king who thought he had no equal. And because he remembered the dream and the interpretation, he was thereby declared greater than him. The night vision reflects the fact that Daniel could sleep under the threat of execution the next day, rather like Peter in prison, all reflects the depth of his faith. See on :3. Daniel’s first response was to thank God for the answer, rather than to race off to the king.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel responded, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever; for wisdom and might are His- Daniel had been shown that the Kingdom of God was to be on earth "for ever and ever", and he envisages praise to God for eternity. The required wisdom was of God, and not of Daniel; this is a major theme in Daniel’s speech to the king, but it reflected how he felt within himself; for his spontaneous prayer of thanks recognizes it.</p>


text:
<p>He changes the times and the seasons; He removes kings, and sets up kings; He gives wisdom to the wise, and knowledge to those who have understanding- The whole prophecy of the image was to result in God’s praise and glory (:20). The challenges of working out the symbolism and its correspondence to geopolitics should not lead us to forget that. Daniel was faced with a "time" and commandment for his own death, made by a despot who considered his own word unchangeable. But for God to change that was a small matter (:9 s:w. "changed"), for He changes the times and seasons of the world powers. "He gives wisdom to the wise" is not Daniel being self congratulatory. Rather he accepts that he and his friends had retained their spiritual wisdom and understanding of God’s ways, and it was in response to that, that he had been given the required insight. The four beasts were "changed" from each other, AV "diverse one from another" (<a href='B:340 7:3'>Dan 7:3</a> s:w:). This is saying that the changes between the metals of the image and then the beasts of Daniel 7 were all orchestrated by God. Daniel understood the image as referring to a succession of kings, not kingdoms; as suggested on :1, this was the primary potential of the prophecy. There would have been a series of kings after Nebuchadnezzar, which would have ended with the mountain of Judah’s kingdom being re-established on earth upon their ruins.</p>


text:
<p>He reveals the deep and secret things; He knows what is in the darkness, and the light dwells with Him- If as suggested on :3 all this happened in one night, then these allusions to light and darkness make the more sense. The future is "darkness" to us, but God reveals the essence- that the process of human history will climax in the establishment of His Kingdom.</p>


text:
<p>I thank You, and praise You, You God of my fathers, who has given me wisdom and might, and has now made known to me what we desired of You; for You have made known to us the king’s matter- Daniel’s praise is not that God has hereby saved his life by revealing the vision; but rather praise of God’s wisdom and the glory of His workings amongst men.</p>


text:
<p>Therefore Daniel went in to Arioch, whom the king had appointed to destroy the wise men of Babylon and said this: Don’t destroy the wise men of Babylon; bring me in before the king, and I will show to the king the interpretation- The command to kill them had been issued in the middle of the night (see on :3), and so we envisage Daniel walking or running through darkened streets to find Arioch. We note too that the wise men owed their lives to Daniel. And yet in Daniel 6 they sought to kill him. This is the power of jealousy; it so often develops from an arrogant refusal to be grateful to a person for the grace of God to us which was manifested through them.</p>


text:
<p>Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste, and said: I have found a man among the captives of Judah who will make known to the king the interpretation- this appears to conflict with the impression given on :16 that Daniel had gone in to the king; but it seems that :16 means that he made an appointment to see the king and tell him the dream, seeing it was now the dead of night. Arioch’s reference to "the captives of Judah" heightens the sense that Babylonian religion and wisdom was being overturned. And Arioch himself seems confident that Daniel has really been given the answer.</p>


text:
<p>The king answered Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Are you able to make known to me the dream which I have seen, and its interpretation?- The king addressed Daniel as Belteshazzar, a reference to the god Bel. Daniel responds by saying immediately that it is the one God of heaven, not Bel of Babylon, who had provided the answers.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel answered before the king, and said, The secret which the king has demanded can neither wise men, enchanters, magicians, nor soothsayers, show to the king- We would likely have answered the king’s question by saying "Yes, sir!". But Daniel is so awed by Yahweh’s majesty that he loses no chances to emphasize that this revelation from Yahweh was an effective trashing of all Babylon’s religious leaders; for the "wise men" were the religious leaders.</p>


text:
<p>But there is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, and He has made known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Your dream, and the visions of your head on your bed, are these- The Babylonians thought that their god Bel lived in Babylon. Daniel stresses therefore that His God is in Heaven. Cyrus later defines Yahweh as "Yahweh, the God of Heaven" (<a href='B:150 1:2'>Ezr 1:2</a>). The God of or in Heaven was therefore a known title for Israel’s God. "The latter days" is a term which refers both to the final end time, when Messiah shall destroy the image as it stands complete in the last day; and also to the general ’future’ immediate to Nebuchadnezzar.</p>


text:
<p>As for you, O king, your thoughts came into your mind on your bed, what should happen in the future; and He who reveals secrets has made known to you what shall happen- ’Those who reveal secrets’ were the magicians and wise men; but Daniel says that it is God alone who reveals secrets, through his agency. I would have been tempted to just blurt out the dream and its message, knowing that the king wary of the slightest attempt to delay, and had ordered my execution by Arioch, who was presumably standing next to Daniel at the time. Just one irritation of the despotic king could lead to Daniel’s head being severed from his shoulders. But still he stresses the glory of Israel’s God before he reveals the dream.</p>


text:
<p>But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but to the intent that the interpretation may be made known to the king, and that you may know the thoughts of your heart- "But to the intent that the interpretation may be made known to the king" is AV "But for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king". Daniel wishes to connect his friends to himself in this matter. He is saying that he has been chosen to reveal the secret just so that Daniel and his friends would not be executed. And yet there were many other young exiles from Judah with them at the time; Daniel seems to count them as not really within the covenant (see on :17).</p>


text:
<h4>You, O king, saw, and behold, a great image. This image, which was mighty- Matthew Henry notes: “Nebuchadnezzar was an admirer of statues, and had his palace and gardens adorned with them; however, he was a worshipper of images, and now behold a great image is set before him in a dream”. He was being shown that all his worship of images was effectively a worship of himself. And so it can be with all religion; we can think we are doing God service when in reality we are merely using it as a channel for worshipping ourselves. The only other time we encounter the sequence of gold, silver, brass and iron in Daniel is when we read that the idols of the Babylonians were made of these very metals (<a href='B:340 5:4'>Dan 5:4</a>; <a href='B:340 5:23'>Dan 5:23</a>), as are the idols of the latter day Babylon (<a href='B:730 18:12'>Rev 18:12</a>). The image reflected back to Nebuchadnezzar how he saw himself.</h4><p>And whose brightness was excellent, stood before you; and its aspect was awesome- “Brightness” was associated with the cherubim, symbols of God’s glory, which were to return from Babylon to Judah (<a href='B:330 1:4'>Eze 1:4</a>; <a href='B:330 1:27-28'>Eze 1:27-28</a>); “brightness” was to be a feature of God’s restored Kingdom in Judah (<a href='B:290 59:9'>Isa 59:9</a>; <a href='B:290 60:3'>Isa 60:3</a>; <a href='B:290 60:19'>Isa 60:19</a>; <a href='B:290 62:1'>Isa 62:1</a>). It is very much the language of theophany (<a href='B:230 18:12'>Psa 18:12</a>; <a href='B:420 3:4'>Hab 3:4</a>) and the return of Christ (<a href='B:600 2:8'>2Th 2:8</a>), and therefore the impression is given that this is a fake Kingdom of God, an anti-Christ, a system which appeared as the true when it was the false. As noted often so far in this chapter, Nebuchadnezzar was playing God. Daniel concludes with a picture of how the brightness of God’s people shall be eternal, as opposed to the fading brightness of the image (<a href='B:340 12:3'>Dan 12:3</a>).</p><p>"Stood before you" implies ‘rose up before you’. It is the same word used of how God raises up kings (2:21), “another kingdom shall arise after you” (2:39), “the God of Heaven will set up a Kingdom” (2:44). The king was being enabled to see himself from outside himself. It is used eight times in Daniel 3 to describe how Nebuchadnezzar defied this revelation by&nbsp; ‘setting up’ another image, purely of gold, as if to say that his kingdom would in fact be eternal; he refused to accept that others would ‘arise’ after him.</p><p>The face of the image is emphasized in <a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>. The AV reads "His brightness was excellent", but the Chaldee word translated "brightness" is the same word translated "face" in describing how the face of the ruler of Babylon was ’changed’ as the sequence of empires had its fulfilment (<a href='B:340 4:36'>Dan 4:36</a>; <a href='B:340 5:6'>Dan 5:6</a>; <a href='B:340 5:9-10'>Dan 5:9-10</a>). The entity represented by the entire image is focused upon the face of the man heading it up. That face was notable and awesome, just as the fourth beast entity was "strong exceedingly" (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a> s:w. "excellent"). The entire image stood "before you", i:e. Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>). The Hebrew idea of q’bel suggests that the image stood there opposite Nebuchadnezzar ’on his behalf’, as a reflection of himself. The image is of course a person; the entity represented by it in its complete form is a reflection of a person, modelled after the king of Babylon. This all suggests that the entity which the image represents will be a personification of someone. That individual would be the caliph or prince which governs it, to whom the entity swears loyalty. And the Islamists insist that loyalty be sworn to their caliph, who in turn is seen as the incarnation of the [false] prophet Mohammed. It is this individual who is the antiChrist of the last days. The appearance of the image of the man was "terrible" (<a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>), it struck fear into the heart of the viewers. And this is the effect of the Islamic extremists on those beholding them. But we can expect more emphasis to be given to their leader, with greater prominence accorded to loyalty to him and an aura of fearfulness emanating from him. The same word translated "terrible" is used of how all nations "trembled and feared" before Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:340 5:19'>Dan 5:19</a>), and of how uniquely and unsurpassedly "terrible" was the fourth beast (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a>) whose leader is an embodiment of it. The Chaldee word resh used for the "head" of the image is also translated ’the sum’. The head, the man whose face was on the image, was the sum of the image, he was the embodiment of it in a person.</p><h4>The head was of "fine gold", and the equivalent Hebrew words are found in <a href='B:10 2:12'>Gen 2:12</a>, where we read that "the gold of that land was good [’fine’]". Which land? "Havilah", according to <a href='B:10 2:11'>Gen 2:11</a>. Perhaps the leader of the entity will therefore be from Havilah. But there are various options in seeking to identify this area. Keil and Delitzsch in their commentary on Genesis opt for a location in the Caucasus mountains- and many of the Islamic fighters are from there, especially from Chechnaya. Other arguments would place it in Yemen or Saudi Arabia, which is where much of the financial and logistical support for the Islamic extremism is currently coming from, seeing they too are Sunni Moslems. Another line of enquiry is suggested by the way that "fine gold" is used to describe what was used in Yahweh’s temple (<a href='B:140 3:5'>2Ch 3:5</a>; <a href='B:140 3:8'>2Ch 3:8</a>; <a href='B:310 4:1'>Lam 4:1</a>). And where did Solomon get that from? Solomon constructed the finer details of the temple from materials prepared by his father David (<a href='B:130 22:14'>1Ch 22:14</a>). And David received that fine gold as a present from Tou, king of Hamath (<a href='B:130 18:9-10'>1Ch 18:9-10</a>). Hamath is in Syria. Perhaps Syria is another possible source of origin for the head of the Islamic image. The true Christ will be "more precious than fine gold" (<a href='B:290 13:12'>Isa 13:12</a>); He will thus stand in opposition at the last day to the head of "fine gold" which heads up the latter day Islamic state. The manifestation of God in Christ is presented in visual form in <a href='B:340 10:6'>Dan 10:6</a> "His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a multitude". This vision has outline similarities with the image of a man explained in Daniel 2. The two ’men’ will face off against each other in the last days; and Jesus wins. That, in the end, is the simple message of all prophecy, especially the book of Revelation:&nbsp; The "head" of the image uses the same equivalent Hebrew word rosh as we find in the Ezekiel 38 description of ten nations being lead against Israel by a rosh, a leader, a prince, what the Arabs would call a caliph. Again and again, we find a specific figure being identified as the leader of the latter day invaders. The interpretation that Nebuchadnezzar was a "king of kings" (<a href='B:340 2:37'>Dan 2:37</a>) was surely understood by him to mean that he was in some sense king over the other kings which featured in the image. Perhaps God graciously inserted this element in order to preserve Daniel’s life before the king. But it will come true in the final erection of the image upon earth, in that the component nations of the image will be headed up by an individual who is effectively a Nebuchadnezzar-like figure for them all, Babylon personified in a single man.</h4>


text:
<h4>As for this image, its head- Literally, the rosh, the great leader, of the image, the same rosh spoken of in Ezekiel 38 as leading a latter day invasion of Israel. The image is of a man; a latter day Nebuchadnezzar. For he was the head of gold.</h4><p>We note that the value of the metals decreases with distance from the head of gold. Dreams reveal our subconscious thoughts and value systems; Nebuchadnezzar saw himself as most important, and as he speculated about the future, those furthest from him in time seemed less important and valuable. But that illusion was shattered by the idea of the Jewish Messiah, the little stone, destroying the image and becoming an eternal mountain on earth. We need to learn the lesson, valuing the Kingdom perspective far above our immediate prospects. It’s worthy of note that the other empires, especially Medo-Persia and Rome, had far greater dominion and extent than Babylon ever had- both geographically and culturally. And yet from Nebuchadnezzar’s perspective, they were inferior and insignificant simply because they were far away from him in time. The dream was in a sense his dream, which is why the empires are described as “inferior” to him; this is how it was from his perspective. But the interpretation was from God, and the twist in the tail is that all these kingdoms of men are to become as nothing before the Kingdom of the God of Israel to be established on earth.</p><p>The increasing inferiority of the metals refers to how the power of the king / emperor decreased. Nebuchadnezzar was absolute, whereas as Daniel’s history itself shows, the Medo-Persian kings couldn’t even change their own laws and were bound by their courtiers. The Greek rulers over the land / eretz were weaker still, because the power of Alexander the great was shared between his four generals, who often controlled him. And the Romans delegated power to local governors, rather than the Caesar himself dominating the land of Palestine from Rome. This serves to demonstrate that the primary intention of the vision was to present a series of kings, rather than kingdoms, which would arise after Nebuchadnezzar, climaxing in the re-establishment of Israel’s Kingdom. But that potential was not realized, and so it was delayed and the fulfilment extended.</p><h4>Was of fine gold, its breast and its arms of silver, its belly and its thighs of brass- The metals decrease in value. And there is progressive disunity; from one head, to two arms, two thighs, two legs, and then very divided feet. The Persian empire was more extensive than Babylon; the degeneration was perhaps in Nebuchadnezzar’s own mind. And the image represented kings or kingdoms who dominated the eretz promised to Abraham. How extensive their dominion was elsewhere isn’t therefore germane to the vision. It could be argued therefore that Babylon had the tightest control over the land; and the powers which followed had less control and allowed more autonomy.</h4>


text:
<h4>Its legs of iron, its feet part of iron and part of clay- The legs of iron more comfortably represent the latter part of the Grecian monarchy, the two empires of Syria and Egypt, the former governed by the family of the Seleucidae, from Seleucus, the latter by that of the Lagidae, from Ptolemaeus Lagus . The idea that the two legs represent Eastern and Western Rome [centered in Constantinople and Rome] is problematic, in that these areas were not part of the land promised to Abraham. The image prophecy speaks specifically of kingdoms reigning over “the earth”, the land of Israel. Turkey [Constantinople] and Italy [Rome] were not part of that land. And they will have their revival in the last days in the form of the feet and ten toes- split between two groups, two entities which between them dominate the land promised to Abraham. As explained on :43 and :1, the prophecy had a number of potential fulfilments; one of which was that the Messiah figure could have re-established Israel’s Kingdom during the time of the Greeks, or in the immediate aftermath of the conflict between the kings of the north and south described in Daniel 11. These two kings, the two sections of the Greek empire which affected Israel, were matched by the two legs of the image.</h4>


text:
<h4>You saw until- The Hebrew here is quite complex; the GNB does well with "While you were looking at it::.", and this forges the connection with Nebuchadnezzar’s sudden fall as he looked at great Babylon which he had built, in pride and surety that it would stand for ever (Dan 4:29-31). This was a primary fulfilment of the image being toppled; it was evidence even during the period contemporary with Daniel that the image prophecy would come true.</h4><p>A stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet that were of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces- The Lord Jesus surely alluded to this in saying that His resurrection would be a rebuilding of the temple “without hands” (<a href='B:480 14:58'>Mar 14:58</a>). It could be that He perceived the possibility of the smiting of the image as being fulfilled in His resurrection. Thus the vision had several potential fulfilments which were not realized. This would explain the gap in fulfilment between the end of the iron leg domination of Israel and their land, and the latter day existence of the ten toes / horns. This apparent awkwardness in the symbology can be explained by Israel not being in their land from then until our last days; but it can also be understood in terms of a reworked fulfilment, after the earlier possible fulfilments were disallowed by Israel’s lack of response. The breaking in pieces of the feet appears to be separate to the breaking in pieces of the rest of the metals ["then::.", :35]. This could speak of two stages of judgment at the Lord’s return.</p><p>But as explained on :1, the initial, potential fulfilment was in the remnant of Judah who "broke lose" (GNB) from the mountain of Israel in Babylon, and who could have broken up the hotchpotch of nations then dominating the land, and re-established the Kingdom.</p>


text:
<h4>Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken in pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors- "To pieces… like the chaff" suggests a breaking up into fine parts. Combining the visual images of Daniel 2 with those of the beasts in Daniel 7, we see a progressive sense of breakup. Babylon was headed by one king, Medo-Persia is presented as a divided kingdom, split between the two arms of the Medes and Persians; then the third Kingdom is likened to a leopard with four heads, referring to the four states that came after Alexander the Great. The fourth empire was divided into two legs (in Daniel 2), and in Daniel 7, it has ten horns, who have conflicts with each other. These are the equivalent of the ten toes, which don’t mix with each other. Then, the entire image is ground to pieces and becomes like tiny pieces of chaff. And the ultimate unity of God’s Kingdom on earth is then established. We see in society generally, and especially in the territory of the land promised to Abraham, a progressive breaking up. And this will continue, until it is confirmed by the Lord’s return breaking into even smaller pieces.</h4><h4>And the wind carried them away, so that no place was found for them- This phrase is quoted in <a href='B:730 20:11'>Rev 20:11</a>, where the "heavens and earth" at the time of the Lord’s coming are likewise carried away and no place found for them. This means that the "heavens and earth" in view at the end of Revelation is the colossus of Daniel 2, the image represents the system which shall dominate the land promised to Abraham in the last days. Here conclusively we see that the main thrust of the prophecy is not some continuous historical account of world history, but rather a depiction of the latter day entity which will dominate the eretz / land promised to Abraham at the time of the Lord’s return. The prophecy insists that the image stands complete when it is struck.</h4><p>And the stone that struck the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth- The "great mountain" of God’s Kingdom fills the whole earth, but the mountain initially begins at one point on the planet. Elsewhere in Daniel, the mountain is defined specifically as Jerusalem: "Your city Jerusalem, even Your holy mountain" (<a href='B:340 9:16'>Dan 9:16</a>). The toes are therefore specifically dominating Jerusalem at the initial point of impact of the stone upon the land. And this is what we would expect from an Islamist confederacy dominating the land of Israel- Jerusalem is the key issue for them. And we know from Zechariah 14 that "the city shall be taken".</p><p>I suggest that the primary interpretation refers to the remnant of Judah, the mountain of God’s Kingdom, which returned to the temple in Jerusalem at the time when it was dominated by a brief coalition of peoples sent there by the Babylonians, some strong and some weak. Being cut out without [human] hands means that it was of God; and Ezra and Nehemiah continually speak of how it was the hand of God which enabled the restoration. "The mountain" so often refers to the Kingdom of God in Israel ruled by a Davidic king, and particularly to the temple mount (<a href='B:50 33:19'>Deu 33:19</a>; <a href='B:230 30:7'>Psa 30:7</a>; <a href='B:230 48:1'>Psa 48:1</a>; <a href='B:230 78:54'>Psa 78:54</a>; <a href='B:290 2:2-3'>Isa 2:2-3</a>; <a href='B:290 11:9'>Isa 11:9</a>; <a href='B:290 25:6-10'>Isa 25:6-10</a>; <a href='B:290 40:9'>Isa 40:9</a>; <a href='B:290 56:7'>Isa 56:7</a>; <a href='B:290 57:7'>Isa 57:7</a>; <a href='B:290 57:13'>Isa 57:13</a>; <a href='B:290 65:11'>Isa 65:11</a>; <a href='B:290 65:25'>Isa 65:25</a>; <a href='B:290 66:20'>Isa 66:20</a>; <a href='B:300 31:23'>Jer 31:23</a>; <a href='B:330 20:40'>Eze 20:40</a>; <a href='B:450 8:3'>Zec 8:3</a> etc:). The restoration prophecies are full of pictures of the restored Zion at the time of the restoration as a huge mountain dominating the eretz. The mountain of Babylon was to be burnt and replaced with the mountain of Yahweh’s restored Kingdom (<a href='B:300 51:25'>Jer 51:25</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>). It was the returned remnant who were to destroy this mountain (<a href='B:290 41:15'>Isa 41:15</a>); they were to be the little stone. <a href='B:290 41:15-16'>Isa 41:15-16</a> is full of reference to Daniel 2 : “Behold, I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff. Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them: and thou shalt rejoice in the LORD, and shalt glory in the Holy One of Israel”. Having spoken of Babylon as a mountain to be destroyed, we then read that it was a little stone which was to bring Babylon down (<a href='B:300 51:25'>Jer 51:25</a>; <a href='B:300 51:63'>Jer 51:63</a>). Restored Jerusalem was to become the stone (<a href='B:450 12:3'>Zec 12:3</a>). That stone was to as it were grow, stone by stone, as the walls and temple were rebuilt (<a href='B:440 2:15'>Hag 2:15</a>). This is the significance of the enigmatic little stone which was to bring about the restoration of the Kingdom at the time of <a href='B:450 3:9'>Zec 3:9</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>; <a href='B:450 4:10'>Zec 4:10</a>. I have suggested that the command to rebuild the temple according to the specifications of Ezekiel 40-48 was a conditional prophecy of what the exiles could and ought to have achieved. The scenario there is all about a mountain (<a href='B:330 40:2'>Eze 40:2</a>; <a href='B:330 43:12'>Eze 43:12</a>). This is why Daniel prayed for the restoration of the mountain of Yahweh (<a href='B:340 9:20'>Dan 9:20</a>)- i:e. for the vision of the mountain in Daniel 2 to come true in his time. But this was disallowed by the refusal of the exiles to follow the path of the Spirit, and all these prophecies of the mountain being established have been rescheduled and reapplied to the Lord’s return (<a href='B:730 21:10'>Rev 21:10</a>). Judah were not the little stone; the prophecy is to come true in the stone of the Lord Jesus, cut out without hands by God through the virgin birth. We are so familiar with this application that we can overlook the initially intended potential application to the Judah of Daniel’s day.</p><h4>Note that the stone was cut out of a mountain, but after hitting the image, it becomes a mountain, filling the whole earth. This second mountain is interpreted as the Kingdom of God coming on earth. Biblically, mountains represent people. The equivalent in Daniel 7 is that the kingdoms of the world are given to "the people of the saints of the Most High" (<a href='B:340 7:27'>Dan 7:27</a>). The first mountain likewise, therefore, refers to people. Out of the mountain of humanity, or perhaps the mountain of the Hebrew people (<a href='B:20 15:17'>Exo 15:17</a>; <a href='B:230 48:1'>Psa 48:1</a>; <a href='B:290 2:2'>Isa 2:2</a> "the mountain of Yahweh’s house / family / people will be exalted"), the Lord Jesus as the stone was cut out without human hands, born through the virgin birth. But the people of God will finally all become like Him. He as the stone becomes them, the mountain. We will finally manifest the Lord Jesus in totality, eternally. And if I am correct in understanding "the mountain" as specifically referring to God’s people Israel, then the second mountain, the Kingdom of God on earth, is in fact the eternal and glorious re-establishment of the Kingdom of God as it was in the form of Israel. And this is indeed Bible teaching elsewhere (<a href='B:330 21:25-27'>Eze 21:25-27</a>; <a href='B:510 1:7'>Act 1:7</a> and see more evidence in my Bible Basics chapter 5).</h4>


text:
<h4>This is the dream; and we will tell its interpretation before the king- The "we" reflects how Daniel was eager to save his three friends. He had asked them for their prayers, and therefore although the answer was given specifically to him, he felt that it was effectively given to them all. Daniel has expressed in :23 that God "has now made known to me what we desired of You; for You have made known to us the king’s matter". This is the unity which prayer develops. It could be that the friends came with Daniel, and that this incident is what brought about the situation in <a href='B:340 1:20-21'>Dan 1:20-21</a>, where Daniel and his friends are found far superior than others in the matter of interpreting dreams.</h4><h4>And yet there is another possibility. Daniel has emphasized how the words he is speaking are not from himself, but from God, who has given the interpretation through Daniel. The "we" could therefore refer to God and Daniel, reflecting the closeness Daniel felt to God.</h4>


text:
<p>You, O king, are a king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the strength, and the glory- The dream of Daniel 2 ascribes to Nebuchadnezzar "the Kingdom, power, strength and glory" (<a href='B:340 2:37'>Dan 2:37</a>), but this is exactly the language of God’s kingdom. The emphasis of passages like <a href='B:130 29:11'>1Ch 29:11</a> is that Yours is the Kingdom, power, strength and glory (as in <a href='B:230 145:11'>Psa 145:11</a>; <a href='B:470 6:13'>Mat 6:13</a>). Nebuchadnezzar is thus presented as an anti-Christ and the Kingdoms of men as a fake imitation of God’s Kingdom.</p>


text:
<h4>Wherever the children of men dwell, the animals of the field and the birds of the sky has He given into your hand, and has made you to rule over them all: you are the head of gold- The animals and birds were even under Babylon’s control, according to this; although as Babylon was the great first beast of Daniel 7, these lesser animals likely refer to the peoples of the land / eretz promised to Abraham. If Babylon reigned over "wherever the children of men dwell" it is clear that the "earth" and "children of men" have a limited, local definition; for Babylon didn’t reign over all the earth. But it is the beasts and birds of the sky who later are prophesied as feasting upon Babylon (<a href='B:730 19:17'>Rev 19:17</a>). This is the equivalent of the horns on the beast hating the whore of Babylon who rides it (<a href='B:730 17:16'>Rev 17:16</a>); the destruction of the Babylon system will ultimately be more by Moslem infighting than direct bolts of destruction from God. Indeed, this was historically God’s preferred method of destroying Israel’s invaders in Old Testament times. The head or rosh of gold strictly referred to Nebuchadnezzar personally rather than the kingdom of Babylon; as explained earlier, the prophecy had a potential fulfilment in a series of kings who would arise, culminating in the restoration of Israel’s kingdom under Messiah. But this fulfilment was deferred until the last days, when the image shall stand complete, headed up by an individual, a rosh, "the king of the north" of Daniel 11, the same rosh who leads the confederacy of ten nations against the Lord Jesus in Ezekiel 38.</h4><h4>The language here recalls what happened to Nebuchadnezzar in <a href='B:340 5:21'>Dan 5:21</a>; he was driven from "the children of men" instead of reigning over them, and became like the animals and birds he was intended to reign over. The idea would be that he had been "given" by God such dominion, but it was taken away from him even during his lifetime. This was an attempt to get him to realize that indeed his kingdom would pass from him to another, he was not immortal; but he was given a wonderful preview of this whilst he was still alive, so that he would repent and accept the import of this vision. We marvel at how God tries to save even people like him and Pharaoh, whom we would likely consider not worth even approaching with the Gospel of God’s Kingdom.</h4>


text:
<p>After you shall arise another kingdom inferior to you; and then a third kingdom of brass, which shall rule over all the land- We should not assume that there are no other possibilities apart from the sequence Babylon- Medo-Persia- Greece- Rome. Each kingdom is to reign over the earth / land of Israel. The second and third kingdoms could refer to Media and Persia; and the fourth kingdom to the Greeks, split into the two parts of the empire which affected Israel- the kings of the north and south of Daniel 11, i:e. the Syrian [Seleucid] part of the Greek empire and the Egyptian [Ptolemaid] part of it. These potential possibilities are because God’s purpose is relatively open ended; the Messiah and the restoration of Israel’s Kingdom could have come at any point in the sequence, and the ideal initial scenario was that there would be a sequence of kings [not kingdoms] after Nebuchadnezzar which would climax in the Kingdom of God and Messiah’s coming. All these potential fulfilments were disallowed by Israel’s lack of repentance. The next kingdom was to be "inferior"; but Persia was greater than Babylon in territory and other ways. The inferiority may have been in that their rulership over the Jews was not as powerful as that of the Babylonians, even allowing the Jews to return and rebuild Jerusalem. However, the Chaldee for "inferior" is identical to the word used for "land" in this same verse. The idea is better that this second kingdom is a kingdom [a king having dominion over] the land [promised to Abraham]. The third kingdom rules over "all the land", perhaps paralleling the idea of the second kingdom being king over the land / eretz. Perhaps the idea was that the third kingdom would rule over all the territory promised to Abraham; from the Euphrates to the Nile. This would have been true of the Persian and Greek empires but not strictly of Babylon nor of Media. The Babylonians didn’t rule the area of Arabia eastward from the Euphrates, but only the fertile crescent; whereas the Persians did. This would make the second kingdom Media, and the Persians the third with the Greeks as the legs of iron, the two legs representing the kings of north and south as explained in Daniel 11. But this is only in the continuous historical fulfilment, which is not that significant compared to the intended latter day fulfilment, when the entire image stands complete, to be destroyed by the Lord’s return.</p>


text:
<h4>The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, because iron breaks in pieces and subdues all things; and as iron that crushes all these, shall it break in pieces and crush- This was not the general attitude of the Romans to the earth / land of Israel, although it has some relevance to the Greeks under Antiochus (see on :39). Such a cruel destruction of the land looks ahead to some future, last day fulfilment, when the image stands complete upon the land promised to Abraham. "Crush" is the equivalent of the Hebrew raah, "evil"; this system was to be the embodiment of the evil determined against God’s people, which is how "evil" is usually used in the prophets. The fourth kingdom, like the fourth beast of Daniel 7, is to break in pieces those on the earth / eretz promised to Abraham. But in turn, the little stone will "break in pieces and destroy" the fourth kingdom along with the entire image, represented by how the bones of Daniel’s persecutors were broken to pieces[s:w:] by the lions. The connection demonstrates that the judgments paid out by the latter day abusers of God’s people will in turn be given to them at the Lord’s return. They will be judged by the Lord as they judged. This is a major theme of Revelation, which describes how the judgments upon the land poured out by the latter day beast are in turn meted out to the beast system in the same territory. This is all foreseen here in Daniel; those who break in pieces the land are to be broken in pieces.</h4><p>John Drake has some interesting comments here: "If you take the time to look at the history of the middle east you will find that the empires that succeeded Greece and the division into the Seleucid and Ptolemaic Empires was not Rome but the Parthians, then the Sassanids and then Islam. It was Islam that overthrew the Eastern Roman Empire in Byzantium. Rome never fulfilled the requirements of <a href='B:340 7:23'>Dan 7:23</a> and <a href='B:340 2:40'>Dan 2:40</a> in crushing breaking and trampling all the others. Rome was able to conquer less than 1/3 of the Seleucid Empire (have a look at history). The Roman Empire does not qualify as the Empire of Iron in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream because it did not successfully conquer and crush Babylon, Persia and Greece. It left Babylon untouched, could not conquer Persia, and its own culture was subservient to Greek culture and language. Rome did not crush any of other three empires. On the other hand Islam was “different from all the other kingdoms” <a href='B:340 7:23'>Dan 7:23</a>. It has one culture (Islam), a different language (Arabic and Farsi in Iran) and one religion. The other empires had multiple gods, cultures and language, as did Rome.</p><p>The divided nature of Islam is very evident in the Sunni and Shia factions of Islam and fits well with the iron legs and the divided nature of the feet. They are one in purpose – the expansion of Islam to rule the world together with the destruction of Israel. The fourth beast of Daniel is the same beast that John sees in Revelation. It is made up of components of the first three beasts. It like a lion (Babylon), looked like a bear (Medes and Persians) and looked like a leopard (Greece). This surely indicates that the beast must be identified with the same geographical areas as those in Daniel and that was Mesopotamia. Bear in mind also that the vision of Daniel 2 was given to Nebuchadnezzar, not Daniel and not Israel. It was about Babylon and kingdoms that would arise in Mesopotamia.</p><h4>The mountains upon which the harlot of Revelation sits represent seven kings. Five are fallen. One is and one is yet to come. Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia and Greece fell before the time of John. The one that existed at the time of John was Rome and one was to come. The one that came was Islam and later the Ottoman Empire. Muslims worldwide and particularly Turkey now seek to revive the caliphate and this I believe is the eighth head of the beast represents the 7 previous empires and it will have dominion over the kingdoms of Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece as represented by the leopard, bear and the lion".</h4>


text:
<h4>Then you saw the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, that shall be a divided kingdom; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, because you saw the iron mixed with miry clay- The coming of Christ is described in Isa 4125 as: “I have raised up one from the north, and he shall come; from the rising of the sun, one who calls on My name; and he shall come on princes as on mortar, and as the potter treads clay”. This connects with the "potters’ clay" here. And Isaiah 41 was potentially about the restoration from Babylon. The “princes” are surely some of the ten kings represented by the ten toes (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>). Note that Israel’s latter day invader is described as one “from the north”; this person will be an imitation of Christ, the ultimate One from the north. His coming will be as “the rising of the sun” (<a href='B:460 4:2'>Mal 4:2</a>), just as that of the antichrist will be. The coming of Christ upon princes who are as clay therefore connects directly with the language of Daniel 2. <a href='B:420 2:6'>Hab 2:6</a> speaks of the latter day Babylonian antichrist figure as one who “lades himself with thick clay”, to be destroyed by the Lord’s coming and the Kingdom of God, when “the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord” (<a href='B:420 2:14'>Hab 2:14</a>). The “clay” would then refer to the same more lowly components of the feet part of iron and clay.</h4><h4>However it is perhaps wrong to imagine bits of iron mixed with clay. It has been commented: "Ancient iron production was by subjecting the ore to intense heat and afterwards driving out the clay by beating. When the latter was done imperfectly the result was"slag"in which iron and clay was mixed". The idea is that the situation was brittle and not strong, even if it appeared strong as iron visually. This will be of great comfort to those persecuted by the ten toe / ten horn system; powerful as it will seem, it is actually very brittle and prone to sudden destruction.</h4>


text:
<p>As the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken- If the two legs correspond to the two parts of the Greek empire which were relevant to Israel, this divided kingdom would refer to the dismemberment of Alexander’s empire. The ten toes of the image correspond to the ten horns on the beast, one of which was far stronger than the others, and uprooted some of the weaker ones. "Broken" is the same idea in the feet and the whole image being "broken to pieces"&nbsp; by the Lord’s return. The idea may be that some elements of the final stage of the colossus are already broken in judgment, by each other. The breaking in pieces of the former kingdoms by some of the later kingdoms, as explained in Daniel 8 and Daniel 11, was really a foretaste of the final judgment upon them all. The same word is used of how Cyrus of Persia would break in pieces Babylon (<a href='B:290 45:2'>Isa 45:2</a>). Isaiah 45 seems to be saying that it was God’s intention that Cyrus would break Babylon in pieces, convert to Him and be Israel’s salvation. Just as it was His intention to convert Nebuchadnezzar and Pharaoh. But this didn’t happen, and so the prophecy was delayed in fulfilment until our last days. Revelation likewise presents the scenario of the warring factions of the last days destroying or judging each other, before the final destruction of them all by the Lord’s coming.</p>


text:
<p><h4>Whereas you saw the iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men- "Mingle themselves" is used of intermarriage at the time when the Kingdom could have been re-established (<a href='B:150 9:2'>Ezr 9:2</a>). If the two legs represent the Syrian and Egyptian sides of the Greek empire, then we see here a picture of the breakup of that situation; and <a href='B:340 11:6'>Dan 11:6</a>; <a href='B:340 11:17'>Dan 11:17</a> predicts the intermarriage between the Seleucids and Ptolemies which would not succeed and which would lead to its destruction. Daniel 11 at various points describes the ending of the Greek kingdom in language appropriate to the Lord’s return and the destruction of the image in Daniel 2 (<a href='B:340 11:22'>Dan 11:22</a>; <a href='B:340 11:36-37'>Dan 11:36-37</a>). As noted on :1, the image prophecy had various potential fulfilments, and one of them was in the coming of a Messianic figure at the end of the Greek kings to re-establish God’s Kingdom. But that too didn’t happen, and the fulfilment was delayed.</h4><p>The prophecy may also have had a potential fulfilment in the situation around AD70. The metals represent kings; the Caesars were partly strong and partly weak in the lead up to AD70, with three emperors in the year AD69 alone (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius). The Lord could have come in AD70 and established the Kingdom; but His coming to do so was delayed because of Israel’s lack of repentance.</p><p>But they shall not cling to one another, even as iron does not mingle with clay- Who, then, are these nations who were represented by the feet partly of iron and partly of clay? Some will be strong, others weak. “Then you saw the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, that shall be a divided kingdom; but thereshall be in it of the strength of the iron, because you saw the iron mixed with miry clay. As the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. Whereas you saw the iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men; but they shall not cling to one another, even as iron does not mingle with clay” (<a href='B:340 2:41-43'>Dan 2:41-43</a>). One only has to look at the various groups currently fighting in the Middle East to see how deeply divided is the Islamist group.</p><p>The situation could actually lead to a fragmentation of the established territories in the Middle East into groups of smaller states, all united under the Al-Sham concept and a desire to drive Jews out of Israel. The same is true for Iraq and other Muslim states bordering Israel. Writing on the Al Jazeera website in May 2013, Murtaza Hussain wrote a penetrating article "Iraq, Syria and the death of the modern Middle East". The following sounds exactly like the ten toes of Daniel’s image, formed out of larger powers but now weak and yet united against Israel:</p><h4>"The countries of Syria and Iraq, formerly unified Arab states formed after the defeat of their former Ottoman rulers, exist today only in name. In their place what appears most likely to come into existence - after the bloodshed subsides - are small, ethnically and religiously homogenous statelets: weak and easily manipulated, where their progenitors at their peaks were robustly independent powers".</h4><p>We of course are reading the Bible through translation. But take a closer look at the original Hebrew and Chaldee translated “they shall mingle themselves” (<a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>). They were to be a mingled people- and that’s exactly who the nations of ‘Al Sham’ are. The original word translated ‘mingle’ is arab. One easy way to check that is to use an online concordance to poke under the surface of <a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>. And you will see it- Strong’s number <a class='strong' href='#sH6151'>H6151</a>. Arab. Surely there is a reference here to the Arab peoples!</p><h4>The ‘feet and toes’ section of the image is proportionally not a very long part of the body. The domination of Israel by this group will not be for long- perhaps the three and a half year period which occurs in several latter day prophecies.</h4></p>


text:
<h4>In the days of those kings- The kings may refer to the ten toes; but it could equally refer to the situation when the image stands complete in the last days. And we would again see that the primary intention of the prophecy was to describe a sequence of individual kings, rather than kingdoms, which would follow Nebuchadnezzar and be brought to an end by the re-establishment of Judah’s mountain or kingdom.</h4><p>Shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people; it shall crush to powder and consume all these kingdoms- The location of God’s Kingdom is therefore going to be in the same arena as earthly political kingdoms, here on this earth. There is no reference therefore to any kingdom of God in heaven, nor any spiritual kingdom in human hearts. We note that the feet of the image are already divided into small parts, as iron and clay; the Lord’s judgment only confirms their own situation by breaking them into pieces. Parts of the feet are already ’broken [to pieces]’ [s:w. "crush to powder"] when the Lord’s return hits them (:42); they have already experienced judgment.</p><h4>And it shall stand forever- This is the same word used of how the entire image "stood" (:31), and of how Nebuchadnezzar blasphemously set or stood up another image all of gold, representing himself (<a href='B:340 3:1-3'>Dan 3:1-3</a>; <a href='B:340 3:5'>Dan 3:5</a>; <a href='B:340 3:7'>Dan 3:7</a>; <a href='B:340 3:12'>Dan 3:12</a>; <a href='B:340 3:14'>Dan 3:14</a>; <a href='B:340 3:18'>Dan 3:18</a>), as if the image he saw would not have its fulfilment, but he would last for ever. The entire image therefore represents the kingdoms of men which are to become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ (<a href='B:730 11:15'>Rev 11:15</a>). The same word is used throughout Daniel 7 concerning how the various beasts all ’stand’, as if on their legs as men, but are brought down to nothing.</h4>


text:
<h4>As you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God has made known to the king what shall happen hereafter: and the dream is certain, and its interpretation sure- <a href='B:520 3:16'>Rom 3:16</a> speaks in the Greek of ‘a dashing to pieces’ of the wicked, perhaps an allusion to how the stone of Messiah’s second coming would dash the kingdoms of men to pieces at His return (<a href='B:340 2:45'>Dan 2:45</a>; <a href='B:730 2:27'>Rev 2:27</a>). But sinners are going now in way of such destruction. Damnation begins now- in the way of life people chose to live.</h4><p>The stone was cut out of a mountain and in turn becomes a mountain which fills the whole eretz, the territory promised to Abraham, where all the elements of the image had once dominated. This of itself suggests that the most natural interpretation of the metals refers to nations located within that territory- including Babylon, Media and Persia. We are so familiar with the interpretation which includes Greece and Rome that we can overlook this. Those four kings, not kingdoms, could have arisen and then been broken by the fragment of the mountain which comes into the territory and then becomes a mountain. I suggest that the primary interpretation refers to the remnant of Judah, the mountain of God’s Kingdom, which returned to the temple in Jerusalem at the time when it was dominated by a brief coalition of peoples sent there by the Babylonians, some strong and some weak. Being cut out without [human] hands means that it was of God; and Ezra and Nehemiah continually speak of how it was the hand of God which enabled the restoration. "The mountain" so often refers to the Kingdom of God in Israel ruled by a Davidic king, and particularly to the temple mount (<a href='B:50 33:19'>Deu 33:19</a>; Psa. 30:17; <a href='B:230 48:1'>Psa 48:1</a>; <a href='B:230 78:54'>Psa 78:54</a>; <a href='B:290 2:2-3'>Isa 2:2-3</a>; <a href='B:290 11:9'>Isa 11:9</a>; <a href='B:290 25:6-10'>Isa 25:6-10</a>; <a href='B:290 40:9'>Isa 40:9</a>; <a href='B:290 56:7'>Isa 56:7</a>; <a href='B:290 57:7'>Isa 57:7</a>; <a href='B:290 57:13'>Isa 57:13</a>; <a href='B:290 65:11'>Isa 65:11</a>; <a href='B:290 65:25'>Isa 65:25</a>; <a href='B:290 66:20'>Isa 66:20</a>; <a href='B:300 31:23'>Jer 31:23</a>; <a href='B:330 20:40'>Eze 20:40</a>; <a href='B:450 8:3'>Zec 8:3</a> etc:). The restoration prophecies are full of pictures of the restored Zion at the time of the restoration as a huge mountain dominating the eretz. The mountain of Babylon was to be burnt and replaced with the mountain of Yahweh’s restored Kingdom (<a href='B:300 51:25'>Jer 51:25</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>). It was the returned remnant who were to destroy this mountain (<a href='B:290 41:15'>Isa 41:15</a>); they were to be the little stone. Having spoken of Babylon as a mountain to be destroyed, we then read that it was a little stone which was to bring Babylon down (<a href='B:300 51:25'>Jer 51:25</a>; <a href='B:300 51:63'>Jer 51:63</a>). Restored Jerusalem was to become the stone (<a href='B:450 12:3'>Zec 12:3</a>). That stone was to as it were grow, stone by stone, as the walls and temple were rebuilt (<a href='B:440 2:15'>Hag 2:15</a>). This is the significance of the enigmatic little stone which was to bring about the restoration of the Kingdom at the time of <a href='B:450 3:9'>Zec 3:9</a>; <a href='B:450 4:7'>Zec 4:7</a>; <a href='B:450 4:10'>Zec 4:10</a>. I have suggested that the command to rebuild the temple according to the specifications of Ezekiel 40-48 was a conditional prophecy of what the exiles could and ought to have achieved. The scenario there is all about a mountain (<a href='B:330 40:2'>Eze 40:2</a>; <a href='B:330 43:12'>Eze 43:12</a>). This is why Daniel prayed for the restoration of the mountain of Yahweh (<a href='B:340 9:20'>Dan 9:20</a>)- i:e. for the vision of the mountain in Daniel 2 to come true in his time. But this was disallowed by the refusal of the exiles to follow the path of the Spirit, and all these prophecies of the mountain being established have been rescheduled and reapplied to the Lord’s return (<a href='B:730 21:10'>Rev 21:10</a>). Judah were not the little stone; the prophecy is to come true in the stone of the Lord Jesus, cut out without hands by God through the virgin birth. We are so familiar with this application that we can overlook the initially intended potential application to the Judah of Daniel’s day.</p><h4>Note that the stone was cut out of a mountain, but after hitting the image, it becomes a mountain, filling the whole earth. This second mountain is interpreted as the Kingdom of God coming on earth. Biblically, mountains represent people. The equivalent in Daniel 7 is that the kingdoms of the world are given to "the people of the saints of the Most High" (<a href='B:340 7:27'>Dan 7:27</a>). The first mountain likewise, therefore, refers to people. Out of the mountain of humanity, or perhaps the mountain of the Hebrew people (<a href='B:20 15:17'>Exo 15:17</a>; <a href='B:230 48:1'>Psa 48:1</a>; <a href='B:290 2:2'>Isa 2:2</a> "the mountain of Yahweh’s house / family / people will be exalted"), the Lord Jesus as the stone was cut out without human hands, born through the virgin birth. But the people of God will finally all become like Him. He as the stone becomes them, the mountain. We will finally manifest the Lord Jesus in totality, eternally. And if I am correct in understanding "the mountain" as specifically referring to God’s people Israel, then the second mountain, the Kingdom of God on earth, is in fact the eternal and glorious re-establishment of the Kingdom of God as it was in the form of Israel. And this is indeed Bible teaching elsewhere (<a href='B:330 21:25-27'>Eze 21:25-27</a>; <a href='B:510 1:7'>Act 1:7</a> and see more evidence in my Bible Basics chapter 5).</h4>


text:
<p>Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell on his face, and worshipped Daniel, and commanded that they should offer an offering and sweet incense to him- As noted on <a href='B:340 3:1'>Dan 3:1</a>, this was the humility and repentance of a moment. Nebuchadnezzar tried to demonstrate through his golden image that this dream would not come true. He was then humbled again in Daniel 4. We too have moments of humility, before God’s word or circumstances brought into our lives, and then our pride so often returns. The offering and incense were typically offered to a god or idol and not to a man (<a href='B:150 6:10'>Ezr 6:10</a>), but the king recognized the intense degree to which God was manifest in Daniel through Daniel’s revelation of God’s word. We too in our witness are the manifestation of God and His Son to men in a very intense identification. All people see of the Father and Son are what they see of us.</p>


text:
<p>The king responded to Daniel and said, Of a truth your God is the God of gods, and the Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, since you have been able to reveal this secret- As noted on :46, there was a very intense association and identification between God and His servant Daniel who manifested Him through the preaching of His word. Daniel was likely expecting to die for having come out with this interpretation, which went so directly against the king’s pride and obvious desire to endure for ever. Nebuchadnezzar’s recognition that Yahweh was "Lord of kings" was effectively a recognition of Yahweh as his lord; although as we will see on <a href='B:340 3:1'>Dan 3:1</a>, he failed to maintain this intensity of devotion. The "kings" he had in view were the kings of the vision; another indication that the primary potential fulfilment of it was in a series of kings rather than kingdoms which would terminate in the re-establishment of Israel’s Kingdom as the eternal Kingdom of God. Inscriptions have been found using these very words about Marduk (Merodach), the idol of Nebuchadnezzar. For him to now apply these words to Yahweh was effectively a renunciation of Marduk. It’s so sad that Nebuchadnezzar failed to maintain his commitment; and this is a disappointing feature of our lives, moments of devotion and realization, followed by a slump back into pride and the old and familiar patterns of thinking. Only the Spirit will empower us not to be like this.</p>


text:
<p>Then the king made Daniel great, and gave him many great gifts, and made him to rule over the whole province of Babylon, and to be chief governor over all the wise men of Babylon- Comparing with :49, we sense that Daniel was exalted even higher than rulership over the province; he was in the king’s gate, one of his close personal advisers. The word of ’making a great man’ is used of how Nebuchadnezzar had been made a great man (<a href='B:340 4:11'>Dan 4:11</a>; <a href='B:340 4:20'>Dan 4:20</a>; <a href='B:340 4:22'>Dan 4:22</a>), made by God a ruler. It is a classic piece of human psychology that now Nebuchadnezzar wants to do to another what he perceived had been done to him by God’s grace. The Biblical record throughout has the ring of psychological and internal credibility in a way in which the uninspired histories of the time simply do not. We note that the "wise men" were effectively the political governors too. Religion and politics were totally connected in Babylon; for Daniel and his friends to be made governors, to be given political power when they had a different religion, was a radical thing for the king to do. And it set them up for the later conflicts we read of in Daniel. Like all of us, they were in an impossible situation. Daniel later rejected all such reward for telling dreams, but I will suggest on :49 that at this point, Daniel’s motivation for accepting it and getting his Jewish friends into power was because he entertained the possibility that all Babylon might be brought to the true God. We too should set our sights high in our preaching work, not content with mere ’witnessing’ for the sake of relieving our conscience, with no great hopes for conversions. The enduring legacy of Daniel is reflected in the fact that centuries later, it was magi, "wise men"&nbsp; from the east, who came to worship the infant Jesus, realizing that his birth was the fulfilment of some of Daniel’s prophecies.</p>


text:
<p>Daniel requested of the king, and he appointed Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, over the affairs of the province of Babylon: but Daniel was in the gate of the king- Daniel clearly did this for the sake of ensuring a good deal for the Jews there, and perhaps also in line with the Divine intention that Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon repent and come to the true God. Just as Isaiah 45 seems to envisage the possibility of Cyrus king of Persia becoming Israel’s saviour after coming personally to Israel’s God. There was likewise an attempt to convert even Pharaoh. These ancient monarchs would have seemed to us not worth wasting effort with; but God did try. And we likewise should consider nobody as just not worth the effort when it comes to our work of witness.</p>


text:
<h4>Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold, whose height was sixty cubits, and its breadth six cubits- The dimensions reflect how Babylon used a sexagesimal system [counting based around sixes] rather than a decimal one [based around tens]. The figure 666 in Revelation 13 therefore points us to a figure who epitomizes Babylon. The breadth is out of proportion to its height- like the kingdoms and glory of men it symbolized, it was fragile and unstable, and easily toppled. He was attempting to deconstruct the image made of various metals, insisting that he as the head of gold would in fact be eternal and not followed by other kingdoms. What he did therefore reveals his humility before Daniel in Daniel 2 as just the passing humility of a desperate moment. We too have seen this in our own lives; humility before God and His people is soon replaced by a return to visions of our own strength. This image becomes the prototype for "the image of the beast" to be established in the last days by a latter day Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:730 13:14-15'>Rev 13:14-15</a>; <a href='B:730 14:9'>Rev 14:9</a>; <a href='B:730 14:11'>Rev 14:11</a>). Those of the last days who are victorious over the beast and his image are therefore represented by the three friends (<a href='B:730 15:2'>Rev 15:2</a>). They are to be no mere Sunday School story for us, but real and actual prototypes of us all in the last days.</h4><h4>He set it up in the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon- This is the same word used of how the entire image "stood" (:31), and of how Nebuchadnezzar blasphemously set or stood up another image all of gold, representing himself (<a href='B:340 3:1-3'>Dan 3:1-3</a>; <a href='B:340 3:5'>Dan 3:5</a>; <a href='B:340 3:7'>Dan 3:7</a>; <a href='B:340 3:12'>Dan 3:12</a>; <a href='B:340 3:14'>Dan 3:14</a>; <a href='B:340 3:18'>Dan 3:18</a>), as if the image he saw would not have its fulfilment, but he would last for ever. The entire image therefore represents the kingdoms of men which are to become the kingdoms of our God and of His Christ (<a href='B:730 11:15'>Rev 11:15</a>). The same word is used throughout Daniel 7 concerning how the various beasts all ’stand’, as if on their legs as men, but are brought down to nothing.</h4>


text:
<p>Then Nebuchadnezzar the king sent to gather together the satraps, the deputies, and the governors, the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, to come to the dedication of the image which Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up- "Rulers of the provinces", implying a gathering of the leaders of the entire empire. This was how insistent Nebuchadnezzar was to demonstrate on a huge scale that he as the head of gold would in fact be immortal; his idea was that he would not be destroyed nor cede power to another empire, as the vision of Daniel 2 required. He would be the entire image; and he wished to make that point to all levels of society.</p>


text:
<p>Then the satraps, the deputies, and the governors, the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, were gathered together to the dedication of the image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up; and they stood before the image that Nebuchadnezzar had set up- This gathering together of people from throughout the empire would have taken time; and so the three friends had plenty of opportunity to plan their course of action. Their devotion was therefore not the zeal of a moment, but a consciously planned willingness to lay down their lives for the one true God. The fact they alone of all the Jews did so makes their bravery the more significant; for it is hard to live on a high level of dedication when our brethren consider it unnecessary and foolhardy. The same had happened over the matter of refusing the king’s meat.</p>


text:
<p>Then the herald called aloud, To you it is commanded, peoples, nations, and languages- The assembled crowd were told to bow down to it whatever nation or language they were from. The idea was that the local rulers of the provinces from throughout the empire may have been local men; and that perhaps there was to be a moment of bowing down observed throughout the empire. This was not merely a local event in the province of Babylon. The idea of a herald calling out a call to worship to all "peoples, nations and languages" is similar to the heralding of the Gospel of the true Kingdom of God to all peoples. Nebuchadnezzar was a fake God, an imitation Christ, a prototype of the latter day antiChrist.</p>


text:
<h4>That whenever you hear- "Whenever" suggests the call to worship was not just a one time event; to build a huge image for just one usage would not be justifiable. There was to be a period of regular worship of this image, perhaps throughout the empire.</h4><h4>The sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music, you fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king has set up- This combination of instruments suggest that the music was associated with religious ritual. The latter day demand to worship the image of the beast will likewise be a specifically religious matter, and it will be consciously designed to deconstruct the claims of the God of Israel. Nebuchadnezzar had fallen down and worshipped Daniel (s:w:) in <a href='B:340 2:46'>Dan 2:46</a>; now he commands everyone to fall down and worship himself. He was perhaps now angry with Daniel because of the interpretation given.</h4>


text:
<p>And whoever doesn’t fall down and worship shall immediately be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace- Remains of such a furnace have been found in the plain of Dura; it was a kind of ’Gehenna’, a burning place for rubbish, and again Nebuchadnezzar is set up as an anti-God, an anti-Christ, playing God, assuming the power of condemnation for not worshipping him.</p>


text:
<h4>Therefore at that time, when all the peoples- LXX "all the nations". The impression is given of Nebuchadnezzar seeking to preside over an imitation Kingdom of God, comprised of peoples from all nations; his proclamation to worship his statue, presenting himself as the eternal Kingdom, then would become a parody of the proclamation of the good news of the true Kingdom to "all the nations". We note here how "all the nations" means ’representative people from all nations’, and this is how we are to understand the language of preaching to "all nations", and "all nations" coming before the judgment seat.</h4><h4>Heard the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music, all the peoples, the nations, and the languages, fell down and worshipped the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up- The record of their obedience to the commandment exactly matches the record of the commandment. This kind of total obedience to "the image of the beast" is to be seen in the last days too.</h4>


text:
<p>Therefore at that time certain Chaldeans came near, and brought accusation against the Jews- The Chaldeans were the supposed interpreters of dreams, bitter and jealous that they had been unable to interpret the dream of Daniel 2. Instead of being grateful to their Jewish saviours, as often happens when we do good to others, they wanted to spite them. They wanted to support the king’ position that in fact the interpretation of the image had in fact been faulty, because the head of gold was going to last for ever.</p>


text:
<p>They answered Nebuchadnezzar the king, O king, live for ever- This was no formal greeting; the message of the all gold image was that the head of gold (Nebuchadnezzar) would last for ever. And they supported this.</p>


text:
<p>You, O king, have made a decree, that every man that shall hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music, shall fall down and worship the golden image- The recorded Biblical history of the restoration often records how the rulers made decrees. Those decrees were considered to be effectively the word of a divine being, unable to be altered, and absolutely certain. But the record shows the tension between the word of the true God, and that of men. The changing of those decrees, or issuing decrees which superseded them, all indicates that their claim to being the Divine word was simply untrue.</p>


text:
<p>And whoever doesn’t fall down and worship shall be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace- This is a similar idea to how the beast of the last days is to be destroyed and his "body destroyed and given to the burning flame" (<a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>). Clearly, what the beast seeks to do to God’s people shall be done to it. This is why the series of judgments recorded in Revelation are so similar, e:g. the seals and vials. The idea is that what the latter day abusers do to God’s people is done to them; they are&nbsp; punished with their own judgments.</p>


text:
<p>There are certain Jews whom you have appointed over the affairs of the province of Babylon: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego; these men, O king, have not respected you. They don’t serve your gods, nor worship the golden image which you have set up- The bitterness of the Chaldeans or magicians / dream interpreters is again apparent. The three Jews had been placed over Babylon as reward for interpreting the dreams which the Chaldeans had been unable to interpret, and so these failed men were jealous and bitter. "Have not respected you" is a three word phrase used again in the accusation against Daniel in <a href='B:340 6:13'>Dan 6:13</a>. It seems that he went through the very same experience in essence. Perhaps he sought to discreetly and tactfully get himself out of the situation; but maybe he later regretted it, and so the hand of providence enabled him to pass through the same situation in essence in the events of Daniel 6.</p>


text:
<p>Then Nebuchadnezzar in his rage and fury commanded to bring Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. Then they brought these men before the king- "Rage" is only once used elsewhere, again in a restoration context, regarding the rage of God at Judah’s disobedience and unfaithfulness to Him (<a href='B:150 5:12'>Ezr 5:12</a>). Nebuchadnezzar was again playing God, as if obedience to him was critical, and he had the right to judge as God. The original word for "fury" is likewise used of God’s fury against Judah at the hands of the Babylonians (<a href='B:290 51:17'>Isa 51:17</a>; <a href='B:340 9:16'>Dan 9:16</a>).</p>


text:
<p>Nebuchadnezzar said to them, Is it on purpose, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, that you don’t serve my gods, nor worship the golden image which I have set up?- "Is it on purpose?" supports the suggestion on :28 that the friends purposefully made some sign of worship of their God instead of bowing to the image. Presumably the other Jews, and perhaps Daniel, had been tacitly allowed by the king to be absent; but these three were "on purpose" making a point, and that was what so irritated the king. We can debate the extent to which we too should ’make a point’ regarding our separation from the world, or act like the other Jews and possibly Daniel did at this time. The case of John the Baptist rebuking Herod for his marriage would be another analogous situation to consider. And we should entertain the possibility that Daniel at this point was weaker in faith than his friends, and symbolically went along with it all. And yet when the decree was given forbidding prayer, Daniel like the friends, and doubtless inspired by their example, chose to ’make a point’ by opening his windows and praying towards Jerusalem in full view of his critics. We see here how faithful examples do inspire others to act likewise, at later points intheir lives.</p>


text:
<p>Now if you are ready whenever you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music to fall down and worship the image which I have made, well: but if you don’t worship, you shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who is that god that shall deliver you out of my hands?- The Babylonians worshipped fire, and Nebuchadnezzar is arguing that the God of Israel was no match for the gods of fire. The king’s anger was doubtless because he had promoted these Jews, despite this being an affront to Babylonian culture and religion; and now they had apparently betrayed his trust. He therefore gave them a second chance, because he maybe didn’t want to destroy them immediately, despite his anger.</p>


text:
<p>Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered the king, Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter- The idea is that they weren’t interested in the offer of a second chance; it had taken time to gather together the leaders of the empire, and they had in that period made their minds up and would not flinch from the possible consequences.</p>


text:
<p>If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace; and He will deliver us out of your hand, O king- The essence of their faith was that "God is able", whether or not He chose to exercise His power in the matter at that time in that way. And they would still serve a God who doesn’t always do what He is able to do, and what we would wish Him to do in the immediacy of the moments of trial. Their words are cited back to them by the king in :29 when he recognizes that indeed, their God "is able to deliver" in a way no other deity could.</p>


text:
<p>But if not, be it known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods, nor worship the golden image which you have set up- Even if God doesn’t ’come through’ as we expect and believe, all the same, we are to live by His principles and serve Him alone. Even if He slays us, we are to trust in Him (<a href='B:220 13:15'>Job 13:15</a>). The worship of the image was more than a merely symbolic gesture; it was somehow connected with serving the king’s gods. He obviously thought that the version of history suggested by Israel’s God in chapter 2 was going to be overthrown by the power of his gods, who would make him, the golden head, have an eternal kingdom. So to worship the image was to accept servitude to the king’s gods.</p>


text:
<h4>Then was Nebuchadnezzar full of fury, and his face changed against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego- This could mean that his face was filled with rage. But to change face toward someone means to change attitudes. This king had promoted these men on the basis of their part in obtaining the interpretation of the dream in Daniel 2. And the king appears to have liked them; but all that changes now. His respect for them turns to burning anger. The friends didn’t fear his fury, and the restored Judah collectively are urged not to fear the fury [s:w:] of their oppressor but rejoice that God will enable the restoration of Israel’s Kingdom (<a href='B:290 51:13'>Isa 51:13</a>). The friends are set up as the pattern for all God’s people.</h4><h4>Therefore he commanded that they should heat the furnace seven times more than it was usually heated- LXX "until it should burn to the uttermost". Fire burning to the uttermost is the picture of Divine wrath in judgment. Again, Nebuchadnezzar is portrayed as setting himself up as God, feeling that he alone was responsible for human condemnation, instead of continuing to be humbled by the vision of Daniel 2. There was no way of measuring how much a furnace had been heated before, nor of accurately multiplying that by seven. So we can assume this is an example of numbers being used in a non-literal sense; although the allusion may be to the Babylonian belief in seven gods and seven planets. Again, the king would be saying that the faithful three were to experience the full wrath of the Babylonian gods. The incident therefore reveals the triumph of Yahweh over all their false gods, which would explain the king’s proclamation concerning the supremacy of Israel’s God.</h4>


text:
<p>He commanded mighty men who were in his army to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and to throw them into the burning fiery furnace- The dragon, symbol of the latter day entity persecuting God’s people, is to be bound and thrown to condemnation (<a href='B:730 20:2'>Rev 20:2</a>). What was done to God’s people is to be done to them, which explains the similarities between the seals [what was done to God’s people] and vials [poured out upon their persecutors] in Revelation. See on :22.</p>


text:
<p>Then these men were bound in their trousers, their tunics, and their mantles, and their other garments, and were thrown into the midst of the burning fiery furnace- Perhaps the function of thetext’s stress upon their clothing was because it was untouched by the fire, and this was in reality the most convincing proof of their deliverance (:27).</p>


text:
<h4>Therefore because the king’s commandment was urgent- LXX "Forasmuch as the king’s word prevailed". The prevailing of the king’s word could suggest that there was some opposition generally to the idea. This is the background for the comment in :28 that the friends "changed the king’s word" (AV). The king’s word was pitted against God’s word, and God’s word prevailed.</h4><h4>And the furnace exceeding hot, the flame of the fire killed those men who took up Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego- We noted on :20 that what was done, or intended to be done, to God’s people is what happens to their abusers. This is a major theme in the prophets, and will be the basis for the nature of the Divine judgments upon the latter day beast.</h4>


text:
<p>These three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace- Like us at times, they were in the fire but not consumed by it, not even their clothes; recalling the burning bush unconsumed. We have here a primary fulfilment of <a href='B:290 43:2'>Isa 43:2</a>: "If thou go through fire, thou shalt not be burned; the flame shall not burn thee". This is in the context of a prophecy of how the Jews could have been restored from Babylon, and the Kingdom of God re-established as Israel’s kingdom, replete with a Messiah figure. But the Jews generally preferred to remain in Babylon; what happened to the friends could have developed into a total restoration of Israel. But the potential prophecy didn’t come true because of Israel’s indolence, and so the ultimate fulfilment has been delayed until our last days.</p>


text:
<h4>Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonished, and rose up in haste- LXX "And Nabuchodonosor heard them singing praises". The LXX includes the prayer of praise of Azarias. We recall how the prison keeper heard the praises sung by Paul and Silas. To praise God in the face of suffering and death is surely the ultimate reflection of faith in Him and loving trust in Him. perhaps their example inspired Paul and Silas, just as faithful examples may inspire later believers to act likewise.</h4><h4>He spoke and said to his counsellors, Didn’t we throw three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered the king, True, O king- "We throw" shows the king’s total identity with the men who had actually throw the friends into the furnace. But those men had been slain by the flames.</h4>


text:
<p>He answered, Look, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are unharmed; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods- This was an Angel, and not the Lord Jesus personally; see on :28. The LXX gives aggelos, "Angel". I have noted several times on this chapter that the Babylonian belief in the god of fire was being deconstructed; and "Son of the gods" could in fact be a reference to Iz-bar ["bar" = "son"], the god of fire. In this case, the allusion would reflect how in fact the god of fire was under Divine control and rendered powerless to destroy the Jews.</p>


text:
<p>Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace: he spoke and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, you servants of the Most High God, come out, and come here. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego came out of the midst of the fire- This coming out of fire is the historical pattern for the statement that "Your people shall be delivered" (<a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a>); again, the friends are set up as the pattern for God’s people of the latter day tribulation. "The most high God" is quite an admission from Nebuchadnezzar. He is recognizing that whether or not his gods really existed, without doubt the God of Israel was the highest. It was God’s intention that this man should indeed come to recognize that He is the most high (<a href='B:340 4:17'>Dan 4:17</a>). But again, Nebuchadnezzar’s appreciation of this was only momentary, for he needs to be taught this reality again by his illness and humiliation. When we are brought to such deep spiritual realizations, we must pray earnestly that we continue in them and not experience them as merely passing moments.</p>


text:
<p>The satraps, the deputies, and the governors, and the king’s counsellors, being gathered together, saw these men, that the fire had no power on their bodies, nor was the hair of their head singed, neither were their clothes changed, nor had the smell of fire passed on them- As they had been "gathered together" to the image, now they were "gathered together" to see these men. Perhaps the function of the text’s stress upon their clothing in :21 was because it was untouched by the fire, and this was in reality the most convincing proof of their deliverance. The Babylonians worshipped the gods of fire, and so the stress that the fire had no power was effectively revealing the bankruptcy of their entire belief system. That no "smell of fire" was upon them would then speak of their total disassociation with the Babylonian religious system. Again, the friends are held up as our pattern for faith n <a href='B:650 11:34'>Heb 11:34</a> - by faith they quenched the violence of fire.</p>


text:
<h4>Nebuchadnezzar spoke and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent His angel- This shows Nebuchadnezzar recognizing that an Angel had been physically sent to Daniel and his friends in the fiery furnace. It seems that great stress is placed in Scripture on the Angels physically moving through space, both on the earth and between Heaven and earth, in order to fulfil their tasks, rather than being static in Heaven or earth and bringing things about by just willing them to happen. See on <a href='B:10 18:10'>Gen 18:10</a>. The Lord Jesus was not an Angel, as Hebrews 1 demonstrates at length; the one like a son of the gods was therefore an Angel and not the Lord Jesus personally, who wasn’t then in existence.</h4><h4>And delivered His servants who trusted in Him, these who have set aside the king’s command, and have yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God- LXX "Changed the king’s word", just as Daniel did to him (<a href='B:340 2:21'>Dan 2:21</a>). This repetition of situation was surely in order to get Nebuchadnezzar to repent; we marvel that God made such efforts to convert this man, as He did with Pharaoh, when we would likely have considered such a person just not worth the effort in trying with. It would seem that the friends went beyond simply not bowing down to the image, but instead yielded their bodies to Yahweh and made some act of homage towards Him, perhaps like Daniel later, praying toward Jerusalem rather than falling before the image. They did this on purpose (:14), to make a point. "Set aside" can also mean "to despise", as the Peshitta renders it. The king is therefore accepting that his word had been despised, and Yahweh’s word had prevailed. He reaches an impressive point of humility, although as we learn in Daniel 4, he didn’t remain at that level but returned to pride. Just as we too so often experience humility as only a passing condition, in time of crisis, when it ought to remain a permanent characteristic.</h4>


text:
<p>Therefore I make a decree, that every people, nation, and language, which speak anything evil against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a compost heap; because there is no other god who is able to deliver after this sort- The Babylonian gods were not saviours; Nebuchadnezzar here recognizes that the God of Israel is essentially a saviour, and we see that supremely articulated in His work through His Son Jesus, Yah’s salvation. The same word for "able" is later used to Nebuchadnezzar in warning him that God is "able" to abase him if he continues in pride (<a href='B:340 4:37'>Dan 4:37</a>). We marvel at God’s continued and constant efforts to convert the king; He taught Nebuchadnezzar that He was indeed "able" to do all things; and then goes on to warn him that He therefore is "able" to abase him, if he continues in pride.</p>


text:
<p>Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the province of Babylon- LXX adds: "And gave them authority to rule over all the Jews who were in his kingdom". The ministers for Jewish affairs were themselves Jews.</p>


text:
<h4>Nebuchadnezzar the king, to all the peoples, nations, and languages, who dwell in all the earth: Peace be multiplied to you- Here we have "all the earth" defined as the area governed by Babylon, and not the entire planet. This assists in our interpretation of the dominions of Daniel 2. Clearly Europe and any area beyond the Middle East is not in view. This proclamation is that made after his humiliation. His response to that humbling was to spread the good news of God’s Kingdom, rather than his own, to every aspect of humanity which he could reach. We too have been given the great commission to do likewise, and we obey it in the humility which comes from having been convicted of our sin and pride.</h4><h4>Nebuchadnezzar’s multi-lingual preaching of the greatness of God’s Kingdom “to all nations” can easily be read unappreciated. But it must have been quite something, involving translating the Gospel of the Kingdom of God into many languages; and it incorporated a very humble expression of his own failures, a recognition of his foolish pride and lack of repentance. And maybe this is exactly why he was the one used by God to make the widest and greatest Old Testament witness to the Gospel of the Kingdom.</h4>


text:
<p>It has seemed good to me to show the signs and wonders that the Most High God has worked toward me- The content of Gospel preaching is the message of God’s Kingdom and His Son. But it is also a reflection of our personal experience of how "God has worked toward me". This is what gives our message credibility.</p>


text:
<h4>How great are His signs! How mighty are His wonders!- These miraculous signs and wonders surely refer to how "God has worked toward me" (:2), for they have no other referent. The way God tirelessly works to humble us and lead us to accept His Kingdom and renounce our own is nothing short of major, dramatic psychological miracle.</h4><h4>His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and His dominion is from generation to generation- Nebuchadnezzar had rejected the teaching of the previous revelation to him in <a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>, that God’s kingdom alone is everlasting, and will not pass to another. He had built an image of gold, as if to say that he the head of gold would in fact last eternally. And now he realizes how wrong he had been.</h4>


text:
<p>I, Nebuchadnezzar, was at rest in my house, and flourishing in my palace- "Flourishing" is the language of a tree, which he will be likened to in the vision he now saw. Again he shows humility by recognizing the truth of the Divine vision concerning him.</p>


text:
<p>I saw a dream which made me afraid; and the thoughts on my bed and the visions of my head troubled me- This is the language of his earlier experience in <a href='B:340 2:1'>Dan 2:1</a>; <a href='B:340 2:29'>Dan 2:29</a>. Circumstances repeat in our lives. If he had humbly accepted the Divine word to him in that first dream, he wouldn’t have needed this further dream and humiliation. The way situations and feelings repeat in our lives is therefore a great encouragement that man is not alone, abandoned in this world; instead we are sure that God is working with us, to humble us that we might be exalted in due time.</p>


text:
<p>Therefore made I a decree to bring in all the wise men of Babylon before me, that they might explain to me the interpretation of the dream- As noted on :5, this was just what he had done in Daniel 2. He ought to have guessed that the outcome would be similarly bad for his pride, and the message of God’s Kingdom would again prevail over him.</p>


text:
<p>Then came in the magicians, the enchanters, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers; and I told the dream before them; but they did not explain to me its interpretation- Again, as noted on :5 and :6, the situation in Daniel 2 was repeating. He ought to have learnt the lesson then, but he didn’t; and he failed his second chance too, with the dream of the tree, but it seems he learnt his lesson finally and became one of the most remarkable converts to the things of the Kingdom.</p>


text:
<h4>But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name was Belteshazzar- Nebuchadnezzar ought to have perceived the inability of his magicians to interpret dreams; he ought to have gone to Daniel first rather than "at the last". But he learnt his lesson right at the end, although requiring a terrible humiliation. Daniel being called "at the last" may well have been because he had moved himself away from all the great promotions he had been given, and eagerly slipped into the twilight, out of the deep conflicts between his conscience for Yahweh and the requirements of the Babylonian court life. We too at times need to reverse the effects of promotion in secular life, that we might be separate for our God.</h4><h4>According to the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods: and I told the dream before him, saying- Nebuchadnezzar proclaims Yahweh as the supreme God. So he may here be admitting his own foolishness in having Bel as his god, and perhaps we are to read in an ellipsis: "In whom [as I mistakenly thought was] the spirit of the holy gods". For he goes on to make it clear that Daniel’s God is the greatest.</h4>


text:
<h4>Belteshazzar, master of the magicians- As noted on :8, Daniel had perhaps distanced himself from the magicians, or had been demoted. And so the king is accepting that Daniel was far greater than them all.</h4><p>Because I know that the spirit of the holy gods is in you- This is the language used of Joseph in a similar situation (<a href='B:10 41:38'>Gen 41:38</a>). Not only did situations recur within the experiences of Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel, but between the lives of Joseph and Daniel. Daniel would have been encouraged that he was no treading a unique path, but that the same loving Divine hand was at work according to a broadly similar pattern.</p><h4>And no secret troubles you, tell me the visions of my dream that I have seen, and its interpretation- The book of Daniel goes on to record that Daniel was indeed troubled by some secrets and visions which he never understood precisely. It’s as if Daniel’s humility was such that he wished this to be recorded.</h4>


text:
<h4>Thus were the visions of my head on my bed: I saw, and behold, a tree in the midst of the earth- A tree represents a kingdom, e:g. Assyria (<a href='B:330 31:1-18'>Eze 31:1-18</a>) or the Kingdom of God (<a href='B:470 13:31-32'>Mat 13:31-32</a>). Nebuchadnezzar as a person was intimately associated with his kingdom, hence he transformed himself from being the head of gold to being the entire image in the statue which he made. It is a human tendency to so identify ourselves with our kingdom, be it our career, family or firm we founded::. that we cannot extricate ourselves to stand alone before God. And Nebuchadnezzar needed immense humiliation before he made that separation. Being "in the midst of the earth" may be a reference to his capture of Jerusalem, as the central point of the eretz promised to Abraham. This was his deepest sin, and what he was wrongly glorified for. It was the seed of Abraham who were to grow into God’s Kingdom "in the midst of the earth" (<a href='B:10 48:16'>Gen 48:16</a>), and not the people of Babylon.</h4><h4>And its height was great- The king of Babylon is pictured as having done this specifically in connection with his intention to conquer Jerusalem: "Thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation in the sides of the north" (<a href='B:290 14:13'>Isa 14:13</a>). As noted above, it was Nebuchadnezzar’s prideful attitude against Israel and Jerusalem in particular which was at the root of his sin.</h4>


text:
<p>The tree grew, and was strong, and its height reached to the sky, and its sight to the end of all the earth- "The earth" is clearly not the entire planet. The way it was seen throughout the empire referred to how Nebuchadnezzar exalted himself personally and was looked towards by all; it alludes to how he had built the image of himself in Daniel 3. He "reached to the sky" in terms of his pride and playing God. The growth of the tree refers to the growth in the king’s pride; he said "in his heart" that he would grow as high as heaven (<a href='B:290 14:13'>Isa 14:13</a>)</p>


text:
<p>The leaves of it were beautiful, and its fruit much, and in it was food for all: the animals of the field had their shadow under it, and the birds of the sky lived in its branches, and all flesh was fed from it- This is the language of God’s Kingdom (<a href='B:330 17:23'>Eze 17:23</a>; <a href='B:470 13:32-33'>Mat 13:32-33</a>). His kingdom had been a fake kingdom of God.</p>


text:
<h4>I saw in the visions of my head on my bed, and behold, a watcher and a holy one came down from Heaven- The watcher even a holy one [one Angel, not two] had already been revealed to Nebuchadnezzar when he observed the Angel with the friends in the fiery furnace. He almost didn’t need Daniel to explain it all. God was constantly working with him to help him, nudge by nudge, come to fully accept Him.</h4><h4>The Angels are ’watchers’ in the sense that they ’watch over’ God’s word to perform it in practice; God would ’watch over’ His words of condemnation of Babylon to fulfil them, and likewise ’watch over’ His word of restoration toward Judah (<a href='B:300 31:28'>Jer 31:28</a>; <a href='B:300 44:27'>Jer 44:27</a> etc:). See on <a href='B:340 9:14'>Dan 9:14</a>. Nebuchadnezzar appreciated that Daniel had the spirit of the "holy ones", and yet he saw a "holy one" come from Heaven. He thereby was being taught that Daniel was in league with God and the court of Heaven, and the Angels were able to fulfil the prophetic words Daniel was uttering. See on <a href='B:100 23:1-3'>2Sa 23:1-3</a>.</h4>


text:
<p>He cried aloud, and said thus: Cut down the tree, and cut off its branches, shake off its leaves, and scatter its fruit: let the animals get away from under it, and the birds from its branches- This is a command to the animals and birds, rather than just a prediction of the disintegration of the Babylonian empire. We can infer that the intention was that Nebuchadnezzar preached this message, bringing about the demise of his own empire, inviting the tributary peoples [especially Judah] to leave the empire and regain their freedom. But Nebuchadnezzar wouldn’t do so. Perhaps if he had done so, then the restoration of Judah could have begun.</p>


text:
<p>Nevertheless leave the stump of its roots in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field; and let it be wet with the dew of the sky: and let his portion be with the animals in the grass of the earth- The stump of the roots was therefore representative of Nebuchadnezzar and his kingdom; for it was he personally who had his portion with the animals. Iron and brass were metals in the image of Daniel 2 which were to come after Nebuchadnezzar. He was to be cut down, and bound by the fact that other kings were to arise after him and take away his dominion. The vision of Daniel 2 was indeed going to come true, much as he had struggled against it through building the state of gold in Daniel 3.</p>


text:
<h4>Let his heart be changed from man’s, and let an animal’s heart be given to him- Man is but as the beasts that perish in his death (<a href='B:230 49:20'>Psa 49:20</a>). Nebuchadnezzar had the idea that he was somehow divine, that he as the head of gold would in fact continue and never give way to others- hence his deconstruction of the Daniel 2 image by his own image of total gold in Daniel 3. But he had to be made to realize that he was not divine, he was human, and human nature is animal nature. The Father works with us likewise for decades to help us realize these same truths, so that we might fully grasp the good news of His Kingdom and eternity.</h4><h4>And let seven times pass over him- The closer one looks, the more conditional prophecies and Divine statements there are. The statement that Nebuchadnezzar would be humiliated for seven times could &nbsp;have been changed by his repentance (cp. :27-29). "Seven times" may not have to be seven years; the number seven is so often symbolic. The idea could be that a significant, defined period would pass over him so that he might thereby be perfected, literally ’seven-ed’. Israel too were to suffer "seven times" of judgment for their sins (<a href='B:30 26:18'>Lev 26:18</a>; <a href='B:30 26:21'>Lev 26:21</a>; <a href='B:30 26:24'>Lev 26:24</a>; <a href='B:30 26:28'>Lev 26:28</a>), seventy sevens (<a href='B:300 29:10'>Jer 29:10</a>), and Nebuchadnezzar had played his part in bringing them about. He was now to realize how he had treated God’s people, suffering the same essential judgments he had poured out- not simply as a ’measure for measure’ judgment for the sake of it, but in order to elicit in him repentance.</h4>


text:
<h4>The sentence is by the decree of the watchers, and the judgment decision by the word of the holy ones- Nebuchadnezzar was told that the destruction of his power was a “matter by the decree of the watchers [i:e. Angels, the eyes of the Lord], and the demand by the word of the holy ones” (<a href='B:340 4:17'>Dan 4:17</a>). The Chaldee words translated “matter, “decree” and “demand” are all legal terms, implying a legal answer / response, “a judicial decision” as Strong defines “the demand”. The book of Daniel often records the kings issuing decrees; but they are nothing compared to the decrees of Heaven. Something came before the court of Heaven- presumably the matter in question was Nebuchadnezzar’s pride and his position on the Jews. Daniel’s advice in 4:27 to shew mercy to the poor may be a reference to what the King should’ve been doing to the Jews- perhaps by enabling their return to their land. And a ‘judicial decision’ was made and “a watcher and a Holy One came down from Heaven” to operationalize it (<a href='B:340 4:13'>Dan 4:13</a>). If this is the extent of Angelic attention to the heart of a Gentile king- how much more earnestly are they debating the states of our hearts and our actions, and issuing decrees for action accordingly?</h4><h4>Nebuchadnezzar’s humiliation was “by the demand of the word of the holy ones”. Was it that the Angels had noticed this man’s awful pride, reported it to God Himself in the court of Heaven, and then been empowered to carry out his demise? The same context reminds us that God does according to His will in the army of Heaven (<a href='B:340 4:35'>Dan 4:35</a>). And yet His purpose is to some extent moulded by them. And we are led to ask, how much influence do we His beloved children have upon His actual purpose? In the context of Daniel, one observes that a “herald” cried aloud to peoples of all nations and languages, and bid them worship the Babylonian image, on pain of being cast into a fiery furnace (<a href='B:340 3:4'>Dan 3:4</a> ff:). And yet in <a href='B:730 14:6'>Rev 14:6</a>, an Angel cries to all nations and languages, warning them that if they do worship the image, they will be cast into the lake of fire. The Angels had observed Nebuchadnezzar’s arrogance and defiance, and many centuries later they will work out their way of parodying it in their future proclamation. The point is, they have the power to work out their way of operation in accordance with their perceptions and understandings; in this we see the “freedom of the spirit” which is now and shall be ever accorded to Yahweh’s elohim.</h4><p>To the intent that the living may know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever He will- The Divine intention at this time was that all the Babylonian empire would come to accept the truth of the message of the Kingdom as explained in the image of Daniel 2.</p><h4>And sets up over it the most abased of men- Everyone would have known the strange abasement of Nebuchadnezzar. The fact he was restored to his throne, rather than being deposed during his incapacity, was therefore an amazing and most unusual object lesson- before exaltation over God’s Kingdom there must come humility and abasement. The Lord seems to allude to this in teaching that he who abases himself the most shall be exalted the highest in God’s Kingdom (<a href='B:470 18:4'>Mat 18:4</a>; <a href='B:490 14:11'>Luk 14:11</a>). The Lord clearly had Himself in view, and Philippians 2 confirms this- He was the most abased, that He might be the most highly exalted.</h4>


text:
<p>This dream I, king Nebuchadnezzar, have seen; and you, Belteshazzar, declare the interpretation, because all the wise men of my kingdom are not able to make known to me the interpretation; but you are able; for the spirit of the holy gods is in you- <a href='B:530 1:21'>1Co 1:21</a> may allude here: "the world by wisdom knows not God". This is no mere ancient history; the principles apply in all ages and situations. Nebuchadnezzar recognizes that his "wise men", whose supposed wisdom was intimately connected with their pagan religious beliefs, were powerless. He tacitly admits that they don’t possess the spirit of the gods which they claimed to. Remember that the text we are reading was part of the proclamation made by Nebuchadnezzar after his humiliation.</p>


text:
<p>Then Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, was stricken mute for a while, and his thoughts troubled him. The king answered, Belteshazzar, don’t let the dream, or the interpretation, trouble you. Belteshazzar answered, My lord, the dream is to the side of those who hate you, and its interpretation to your adversaries- This is the classic encouragement to all of us when we fear to speak forth God’s word, scared of how our audience will receive it. This verse is still part of the proclamation made by Nebuchadnezzar throughout his realm, he wished to show everyone what had transpired. The fact he didn’t have Daniel immediately slain is to his credit; Daniel was fearful because he knew just how proud Nebuchadnezzar was, and how the king had railed against Daniel’s interpretation of the Daniel 2 dream by building an image of gold, subverting the idea that the head of gold was to pass away. He was likely encouraged by the Biblical examples of young Joseph and Samuel speaking forth God’s word to men whom they knew would not welcome their message. The haters and adversaries of Nebuchadnezzar were symbolized by the brass and iron which bound the stump; the metals of the Daniel 2 image which were to supercede Nebuchadnezzar.</p>


text:
<p>The tree that you saw, which grew, and was strong, whose height reached to the sky, and its view to all the earth- "Which grew" translates the same Hebrew term translated "made [Daniel] a great man" (<a href='B:340 2:48'>Dan 2:48</a>). Daniel had eased himself out of that exaltation; whenever he was exalted, he seems to have slipped out of the limelight, for the next time he’s needed, he has to be searched for. But Nebuchadnezzar hadn’t yet learnt that true greatness is not in this life. "Height" is the same word used in <a href='B:340 5:20'>Dan 5:20</a> for how his heart was "lifted up"; as noted on :22, it was the state of his heart which was of such critical importance to God. And therefore the king uses it in :37 to say that now he extols or lifts up the one true God- rather than himself. To repent of pride is very difficult, and Nebuchadnezzar sets a great example- although it was only achieved by grace alone, and repeated Divine efforts and a huge abasement.</p>


text:
<p>Whose leaves were beautiful, and its fruit much, and in it was food for all; under which the animals of the field lived, and under whose branches the birds of the sky had their habitation- The similarities with imagery of God’s Kingdom are clear (<a href='B:470 13:31-32'>Mat 13:31-32</a>). On one level, Babylon was a pseudo kingdom of God with Nebuchadnezzar as a fake God and Messiah. But the similarities perhaps also point to how that if Nebuchadnezzar had repented and his people accepted his testimony about God’s Kingdom, his kingdom could have become part of the revived kingdom of God in Israel. The submission of all animal life to Nebuchadnezzar is after the pattern of Adam in Eden; and his pride led him to a fall after the pattern of Adam.</p>


text:
<p>It is you, O king, that has grown and become strong; for your greatness is grown, and reaches to the sky, and your dominion to the end of the earth- "Strong" is the word for "hard"; it is used again in <a href='B:340 5:20'>Dan 5:20</a> "his mind was hardened in pride". This prophecy about the king is therefore specifically about his heart; this is the essential nature and indicator of a person before God. Nebuchadnezzar’s empire was largely inherited, and even Babylon was glorious when he came to the throne; he rebuilt parts of it and made cosmetic improvements. So the astounding growth depicted here refers more to the growth of his own glory within his own proud mind. "It is you" focuses the interpretation upon Nebuchadnezzar as a person, but clearly the language of :20,21 is about his kingdom. He was his kingdom, just as the Kingdom of the Lord Jesus is within or amongst people; He is the One in view, the king is so identified with His Kingdom (<a href='B:490 17:21'>Luk 17:21</a>).</p>


text:
<p>Whereas the king saw a watcher and a holy one coming down from Heaven and saying, Cut down the tree, and destroy it; nevertheless leave the stump of its roots in the earth, even with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field, and let it be wet with the dew of the sky: and let his portion be with the animals of the field, until seven times pass over him- See on <a href='B:300 23:18'>Jer 23:18</a>; <a href='B:300 23:22'>Jer 23:22</a>. "And destroy it" is added here; in contrast with how God’s Kingdom shall never be destroyed (<a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>). Nebuchadnezzar had tried to deconstruct that image by making an entire image of gold. And yet the leaving of the stump in the earth showed that he could still have hope of life even after that.</p>


text:
<p>This is the interpretation, O king, and it is the decree of the Most High, which has come on my lord the king- This contrasts with :17 "the decree of the watchers"; the one and only Most High God is to be accepted rather than the king’s vague idea of Divine "Watchers". Again we see the Father’s patient efforts to spiritually educate this proud man whom we would likely not have bothered preaching to.</p>


text:
<p>That you shall be driven from men, and your dwelling shall be with the animals of the field, and you shall be made to eat grass as oxen, and shall be wet with the dew of the sky, and seven times shall pass over you; until you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever He will- The king was initially like a tree with all the animals of the field beneath him, and now he was to be made like one of them. Every sin is in some form an essential replication of that of Adam and Eve. They passed through the same. Nebuchadnezzar’s conversion to the Gospel of the Kingdom of God involved recognizing that man is but as the beasts which perish, mortal and not immortal.</p>


text:
<p>Whereas they commanded to leave the stump of the roots of the tree; your kingdom shall be sure to you, after that you shall have known that the Heavens do rule- We are guided in understanding the meaning of the stump by <a href='B:220 14:7'>Job 14:7</a>, which seems to be saying that a tree whose stump is left at least has the hope of sprouting again, which Job understood as meaning resurrection. Tree stumps are not usually bound with brass and iron; such bonds would not stop the tree sprouting again. The point is that the root was not removed. I suggest that Nebuchadnezzar was being taught that his earthly kingdom would indeed end and the kingdoms of brass and iron would play a part in that, as taught by the Daniel 2 image vision. But if he redefined his kingdom as the Kingdom of God, which is eternal, then his kingdom, which would beGod’s Kingdom when the kingdoms of this world become those of God (<a href='B:730 11:15'>Rev 11:15</a>), would indeed be eternal. And there is every reason to think that Nebuchadnezzar was finally converted to this good news of the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom is only "made sure" to anyone by resigning our own kingdoms and making God’s Kingdom ours.</p>


text:
<h4>Therefore, O king, let my advice be acceptable to you, and break off your sins by righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the poor; if there may be a lengthening of your prosperity- The prophecy about his humiliation need not have come true if he had repented; just as the statement that Babylon would be destroyed in 40 days didn’t come true because of the Ninevites’ repentance. But like us, Nebuchadnezzar had to be an empirical learner, rather than humbling himself before the word of God and just obeying it. The "righteousness" and "mercy to the poor" may have specifically referred to his allowing the restoration of God’s Kingdom in the form of the kingdom of Judah. "Righteousness" is a favourite theme of Isaiah’s prophecies of the restoration (<a href='B:290 45:8'>Isa 45:8</a>; <a href='B:290 54:14'>Isa 54:14</a>; <a href='B:290 56:1'>Isa 56:1</a>; <a href='B:290 63:1'>Isa 63:1</a> etc:). "Mercy to the poor" is the word used of how God would "favour" Zion at the restoration (<a href='B:230 102:13-14'>Psa 102:13-14</a>; <a href='B:290 30:19'>Isa 30:19</a>). "The poor" is literally ’the afflicted ones’, a term used of Judah afflicted by the Babylonians (<a href='B:150 8:21'>Ezr 8:21</a>; <a href='B:290 60:14'>Isa 60:14</a>; <a href='B:310 5:11'>Lam 5:11</a>).</h4><h4>&nbsp;"Break off" is a term used of removing the yoke upon captive Judah (<a href='B:230 136:24'>Psa 136:24</a>; <a href='B:310 5:8'>Lam 5:8</a>; <a href='B:330 19:12'>Eze 19:12</a>); and "sins" may be an intensive plural for his one great sin, which was the holding of Judah in captivity. All this could be reversed by Nebuchadnezzar repenting of his pride, handing his kingdom over to Yahweh, and allowing the Jews to return and re-establish the Kingdom of God in Judah.</h4>


text:
<p>All this came on the king Nebuchadnezzar- This is tantamount to saying that he did not accept Daniel’s plea for his repentance in :27.</p>


text:
<p>At the end of twelve months he was walking in the royal palace of Babylon- So often, God makes a statement of judgment, but there is a gap between the statement and the fulfilment. We all are located within that gap until we die. But there are specific matters over which we may be given a period of time to repent of. Nebuchadnezzar was given twelve months. And he didn’t. But there was a plan D for him still, involving serious humiliation. And it seems he responded to that. We have such things going on in our lives, although they are seen clearer in the lives of others.</p>


text:
<h4>The king spoke and said- These words may well have been simply his innermost thoughts. But as the Lord makes clear, the thoughts of the heart are read by God as our words. He apparently said or thought these things whilst viewing the city, so he would have been on a rooftop, the place of solace and meditation (cp. <a href='B:100 11:2'>2Sa 11:2</a>).</h4><h4>Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the royal dwelling place, by the might of my power and for the glory of my majesty?- Nebuchadnezzar realized after his humbling that one of his reasons for pride had been due to him not realizing the extent to which the "great Babylon which (he) had built" and the Kingdom he had gained were&nbsp; in fact the total result of the work of the Angels; "He doeth according to His will in the army of Heaven (the Angels), and among the inhabitants of the earth" (:35). The bricks of ancient Babylon all have Nebuchadnezzar’s name on them. Pride in our own homes, or our kingdoms no matter how small or great in secular terms, can be the same essential sin. A sense of God’s majesty and power is essential if we are to avoid this temptation to glorify our own power and apparent majesty. And much of that apparent majesty is anyway in our own eyes only, as it was for Nebuchadnezzar; for Babylon was already great when he became king, and all he did was to rebuild parts of it and make cosmetic improvements.</h4>


text:
<h4>While the word was in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from Heaven, saying, O king Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken- See on <a href='B:680 2:10'>2Pe 2:10</a>. I suggested on :30 that his statement may have been simply in his own heart, but it was counted as being a word in his mouth by the God who considers thoughts to be words. His word and the Divine word are here contrasted.</h4><h4>The kingdom hasdeparted from you- The same word is used of how the Daniel 2 image vision meant that God "removed" (s:w. "departed") kings, including Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:340 2:21'>Dan 2:21</a>; <a href='B:340 7:12'>Dan 7:12</a>). He ought to have continued believing in that Divine word; but he had to be brought to accept it through this deep humiliation, when he could have avoided that by simply accepting God’s word as it is. And it’s the same for us. This is why attitude to God’s word, rather than simply reading it, is so critically important in human life. It is why acceptance that the Bible is the inspired word of God has such endless implications in human life.</h4>


text:
<h4>And you shall be driven from men; and your dwelling shall be with the animals of the field; you shall be made to eat grass as oxen- The AV translates this as if it was the "men" who would make him eat grass. In this case, we have implied humiliation at the hands of his own courtiers, rather than simply an illness. This seems confirmed by <a href='B:340 5:20'>Dan 5:20</a>, which speaks of his glory being taken from him.</h4><h4>And seven times shall pass over you; until you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever He will- "Times" in Daniel can mean a year, but in other places, simply a period of time. It could have been seven days, months or some other period. Nebuchadnezzar had been taught that God rules over the kingdoms of men and would in due course subsume them into His Kingdom. He had momentarily accepted that at the end of Daniel 2. But that understanding of the Gospel of the Kingdom was but theoretical and transient. He had to be taught the personal truth of it by humiliation. But that could have been avoidable had he accepted God’s word through Daniel in his heart.</h4>


text:
<p>The same hour was the thing fulfilled on Nebuchadnezzar: and he was driven from men, and ate grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of the sky, until his hair was grown like eagles’ feathers, and his nails like birds’ claws- This could have been the medical condition known as insania zoanthropica, but it seems more likely that it was a uniquely designed punishment with the aim in view of eliciting his repentance. The dew was "from heaven", as if to point out that God was in all this, seeking to bring Nebuchadnezzar unto Himself.</p>


text:
<h4>At the end of the days- The "seven times". "Times" need not refer to years, it could be literal days or any period.</h4><p>I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted up my eyes to heaven- This is the language of prayerful repentance.</p><p>And my understanding returned to me- The only true understanding is that we are as beasts and God’s Kingdom is over all. It "returned to me" in that he returned to the humility before God which he had momentarily had after the Daniel 2 image vision and after Daniel’s explanation of his latest dream 12 months previously. Nebuchadnezzar had earlier recognized that Daniel was the one with "understanding" (<a href='B:340 1:4'>Dan 1:4</a>; <a href='B:340 1:17'>Dan 1:17</a>; <a href='B:340 2:21'>Dan 2:21</a>; <a href='B:340 5:12'>Dan 5:12</a> s:w:). It’s as if he was saying that he had once accepted Daniel’s "understanding", which was God’s understanding- that he was only the head of gold, and his kingdom would pass away and ultimately be subsumed within God’s Kingdom. And now he again accepted that, his earlier humility and "understanding" of a moment returned to him permanently.</p><h4>And I blessed the Most High, and I praised and honoured Him who lives forever; for His dominion is an everlasting dominion, and His kingdom from generation to generation- Now finally he accepts the truth of the image vision of <a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>. If he had accepted it more deeply and from the heart at the time, he wouldn’t have needed to be so humiliated in order to learn its truth on a personal level. We too need to convert our Sunday School Christianity, or our previous acceptance of the Gospel of God’s Kingdom, into deep personal reality. If we won’t do so, still proudly seeking to build up our own kingdoms, then we too shall be humbled in a desperate Divine attempt to help us accept the truth of His Kingdom so that we might enjoy it eternally.</h4>


text:
<h4>All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing- This is not to say that God doesn’t value the human person. Nebuchadnezzar had proudly reflected that all the peoples of the "earth" which he knew were under his control. But that, he now realized, was nothing.</h4><p>And He does according to His will in the army of heaven- The apparently invincible Babylonian army, through which Nebuchadnezzar had attained his empire, were nothing compared to the Angelic army of Yahweh of hosts.</p><h4>And among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay His hand, or ask Him, What are You doing?-Nebuchadnezzar’s image of gold had been an attempt to stay God’s hand, to stop him as the head of gold being deposed and taken over by others. Now he more deeply accepted the truth which he had briefly perceived after Daniel had explained it to him in Daniel 2. The same word for "stay" is used of how the stone "smote" the image and ground all of it to powder, including Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom (<a href='B:340 2:34-35'>Dan 2:34-35</a>).</h4>


text:
<h4>At the same time my understanding returned to me- See on :34.</h4><h4>And the glory of my kingdom, my majesty and brightness returned to me; and my officials and my lords sought to me; and I was established in my kingdom, and excellent greatness was added to me- There is no historical evidence that Nebuchadnezzar in his final years became even greater and more glorious than when he proudly strutted the rooftop admiring great Babylon which he had built. Having committed his kingdom and glory to God’s Kingdom and glory, it would read rather strangely if in fact he then regained all his secular glory. I suggest that he is now reframing his understanding of glory and majesty. The glory we have, and which he had, was to be with the Lord God, on the side of His Kingdom and prophetic program. The AV offers: "And for the glory of my kingdom, mine honour and brightness returned unto me". The idea would be that instead of secular glory, he had the glory of knowing God in truth. The return of "my understanding", which as noted on :34 referred to his understanding of God’s ways, is paralleled with the return of his glory. But his glory was in that he now knew God in the sense of having relationship with him. There is a strong appropriacy of <a href='B:300 9:23-24'>Jer 9:23-24</a> to Nebuchadnezzar: "Thus says Yahweh, Don’t let the mighty man glory in his might, don’t let the rich man glory in his riches; but let him who glories glory in this, that he has understanding, and knows Me, that I am Yahweh who exercises loving kindness, justice, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, says Yahweh". The "excellent greatness" that he felt had been added to him was therefore in reference to God’s grace, rather than any reference to secular things. The original seems to mean "the pre-eminent, ultimate" greatness; and he now realized that the ultimate exaltation was to walk humbly with your God and have the hope of the Kingdom.</h4>


text:
<p>Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honour the King of heaven; for all His works are truth, and His ways justice; and those who walk in pride He is able to abase- "Extol" is literally ’to lift up’, the same word used of how previously he had lifted himself up rather than God (see on :20). He openly accepts his pride and appropriate abasement. His acceptance of Yahweh as the ultimate King, rather than himself or his previous god Bel, was effectively a resignation of his own kingship and kingdom to Yahweh.</p>


text:
<p>Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand- Belshazzar was the effective king of Babylon whilst Nabonidus was in north Africa. Belshazzar means "Bel Protect the King", and he clearly believed that Bel would protect Babylon even with the Medes approaching- and he believed this to the extent of recklessly feasting with the Medes outside the gates. Again, we find the historical accounts in Daniel to be deconstructions of the supposed power of the Babylonian gods, who are revealed as powerless before Yahweh’s purpose; just as the dream of Daniel 2 had depicted. The feast was likely an annual religious festival, and Cyrus / Darius planned the attack at precisely that time. Again, we see the victory as being a victory specifically against the guardian gods of Babylon. The destruction of Babylon whilst feasting was specifically foretold (<a href='B:290 21:4-5'>Isa 21:4-5</a>; <a href='B:300 50:24'>Jer 50:24</a>; <a href='B:300 51:39'>Jer 51:39</a>; <a href='B:300 51:57'>Jer 51:57</a>).</p>


text:
<h4>Belshazzar, while he tasted the wine, commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels- This was a conscious act of blasphemy. The God of Israel had foretold in Daniel 2 that Babylon would be taken over by another empire; and Jeremiah had made it clear in the previous generation that although Babylon would take Jerusalem, Babylon would also fall to her enemies (<a href='B:300 50:28'>Jer 50:28</a> etc:). Belshazzar seems to have been aware of this, and with enemy armies outside the gates, he trusts in his god to preserve him and mocks Yahweh. He was turning the table of Yahweh into the table of Bel and the gods supposed to preserve Babylon. In essence we commit the same sin if we turn the Lord’s table into our table, in glorification of our own religion and worldview.</h4><h4>Which Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken out of the temple which was in Jerusalem; that the king and his lords, his wives and his concubines, might drink from them- The miserable critics point out that Belshazzar’s father was the usurper Nabuna’id [Nabonidus]. But "father" simply means ’ancestor’ in practice, and could refer to Nebuchadnezzar as his grandfather (as in <a href='B:10 28:13'>Gen 28:13</a>; <a href='B:10 32:9'>Gen 32:9</a>), which he could have been, if Nabuna’id had Belshazzar through one ofNebuchadnezzar’s daughters. Indeed this would appear a likely and logical way for Nabuna’id to enforce his claim to the throne and establish his dynasty. That Belshazzar was the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar is confirmed by <a href='B:300 17:27'>Jer 17:27</a>: "All the nations shall serve him (Nebuchadnezzar) and his son, and his son’s son until the very time of his land come". But father-son relationships were presented at the time in a far less specific sense than the terms are used today.</h4>


text:
<p>Then they brought the golden vessels that were taken out of the temple of God’s house which was at Jerusalem; and the king and his lords, his wives and his concubines, drank from them- "The temple of God’s house" means not generally ’the temple’ ["God’s house"] but specifically the holy and most holy place. There would not have been many "golden vessels" there; just those used for pouring out the blood on the day of atonement. They would therefore have passed these vessels between them all, as they all drunk from them (:23), rather like a mock communion service. It was very deep blasphemy. It seems that the golden candlestick from the holy place was also present (:5). They were pretending that their table of drunken revelry was the most holy place of the Jerusalem temple.</p>


text:
<p>They drank wine, and praised the gods of gold, and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone- They were imitating the worship of Yahweh (see on :3), and replacing Him with their gods. The golden vessels were now see as part of the paraphernalia of the worship of their golden gods. Gold, silver, brass, iron and a little stone all feature in the vision of Daniel 2. In Daniel 3, Nebuchadnezzar tried to say that the vision was wrong and he as the golden head was going to be the entire image. So here, they were saying that their gods of those same metals were the true gods and that the image was really just a composite of their gods, with the king of Babylon as the eternal head of it.</p>


text:
<h4>In the same hour came forth the fingers of a man’s hand, and wrote opposite the lampstand- This candlestick may have been the one taken from the holy place of the Jerusalem temple; as noted on :3, they were pretending that their table of drunken revelry was the most holy place of the Jerusalem temple.</h4><p>On the plaster of the wall of the king’s palace- Literally, "the chalk"; and this was exactly how the palace walls unearthed in Nineveh appear to have been constructed.</p><h4>And the king saw the part of the hand that wrote- "The palm". I will suggest on :8 that the hand covered the writing, and only Daniel could as it were make the Angelic hand move to reveal it (:24). This would explain the confusion between the palm and the fingers which wrote.</h4>


text:
<p>Then the king’s appearance changed, and his thoughts alarmed him; the joints of his thighs were loosened, and his knees struck one against another- This is the picture of a man facing Divine judgment. We should all be there; the wonder is that for us, as Paul explains in Romans, we are there, but then saved from it by grace through Christ. And it is the picture of the middle eastern world, and indeed the whole planet, on the eve of Divine judgment (<a href='B:490 21:25'>Luk 21:25</a>).</p>


text:
<p>The king cried aloud to bring in the enchanters, the Chaldeans, and the soothsayers. The king spoke and said to the wise men of Babylon, Whoever shall read this writing, and show me its interpretation, shall be clothed with purple, and have a chain of gold about his neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom- It was the job description of the wise men to interpret such things; to offer them huge reward for doing their job indicates not only the king’s desperation, but also the tacit recognition that usually they could not really accurately interpret such things. History was of course repeating, for this was the very scene of Daniel 2, when the image vision was interpreted as meaning that Babylon too must pass over to others. Belshazzar should have perceived the similarities, and called for Daniel immediately. Again we note the similarities with Joseph (<a href='B:10 41:42'>Gen 41:42</a>), who would have been a great role model for Daniel. We too will find such role models in the Bible as we face our various life experiences.</p>


text:
<p>Then came in all the king’s wise men; but they could not read the writing, nor reveal to the king the interpretation- As noted on :7, this is a conscious repetition of the scene in Daniel 2. But Belshazzar failed to respond appropriately. Perhaps they couldn’t read the writing because the Angelic hand was covering it, and only Daniel had the power to remove that hand (:24).</p>


text:
<p>Then was king Belshazzar greatly troubled, and his appearance was changed, and his lords were perplexed- <a href='B:490 21:25'>Luk 21:25</a> appears to allude here. The king was on the eve of God’s judgment, and he knew it. Why be so worried about what could have been shrugged off as an optical illusion? He was after all quite drunk. We see in this matter evidence enough that even the most hardened blasphemers have a conscience, somewhere deep down. This should encourage us to never consider anyone not worth witnessing to. There is a gap in every heart and psyche which only the gospel of God’s Kingdom can satisfy. We were wired that way. The description is that of Nebuchadnezzar when he realized that the three Jewish friends were being preserved in the fire by an Angel (<a href='B:340 3:24'>Dan 3:24</a>), and of Nebuchadnezzar when he saw the revelation of his own downfall (<a href='B:340 4:5'>Dan 4:5</a>). The historical incidents in Daniel all share such points of commonality, to demonstrate the same Divine hand in the affairs of men. He works according to a similar imprint and hallmark. And that continues to this day. It is why we can look back upon our lives and see that they make sense. "Appearance" is the same original word translated "brightness"; Nebuchadnezzar’s appearance was likewise changed but he repented, and it changed back to how it previously was (<a href='B:340 4:36'>Dan 4:36</a>). But Belshazzar would not repent. He failed to learn from history. The same word is used of the bright appearance of the image in <a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>, which was to be changed and brought to nothing. Time and again, we see the basic truth of that image revealed in the immediate history of those times.</p>


text:
<p>Now the queen because of the words of the king and his lords came into the banquet house: the queen spoke and said, O king, live forever; don’t let your thoughts trouble you, nor let your appearance be changed- This may refer to the king’s mother, the queen mother, hence she is mentioned separately to his wives in :2,3. As noted on :2, this would then refer to Nebuchadnezzar’s daughter, who would therefore have remembered Daniel’s interpretations.</p>


text:
<p>There is a man in your kingdom, in whom is the spirit of the holy gods; and in the days of your father light and understanding and wisdom, like the wisdom of the gods, were found in him. The king Nebuchadnezzar your father, the king, I say, your father, made him master of the magicians, enchanters, Chaldeans, and soothsayers- The history of Daniel and his interpretations was therefore well known, although Belshazzar had put it out of his mind, even though he knew Daniel and employed him as one of his workers (<a href='B:340 8:1'>Dan 8:1</a>; <a href='B:340 8:27'>Dan 8:27</a>). We too can put inconvenient truth far from our minds instead of recalling it to mind and being humbled by it unto repentance. We note her laboured emphasis of the fact that Nebuchadnezzar was his ancestor, which may have been counted on the basis that she was a daughter or granddaughter of Nebuchadnezzar. She was aware of Nebuchadnezzar’s repentance and perhaps hoped that Belshazzar would likewise humble himself.</p>


text:
<p>Because an excellent spirit, and knowledge, and understanding, the interpreting of dreams, and revealing of strange messages, solving of problems and dissolving of doubts, were found in the same Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar. Now let Daniel be called, and he will show the interpretation- Daniel was still working for Belshazzar and was therefore known (<a href='B:340 8:1'>Dan 8:1</a>; <a href='B:340 8:27'>Dan 8:27</a>). The way he is spoken of as being somewhat distant and unknown therefore suggests he had been ousted from the ranks of the dream interpreters, or had removed himself from them, and was working for the king in a different capacity. We too may need to remove ourselves from situations where we are in a conflict of conscience, even if it means a loss of power and kudos.</p>


text:
<p>Then was Daniel brought in before the king. The king spoke and said to Daniel, Are you that Daniel, who are of the children of the captivity of Judah, whom the king my father brought out of Judah?- We must remember that Belshazzar knew Daniel and employed him (<a href='B:340 8:1'>Dan 8:1</a>; <a href='B:340 8:27'>Dan 8:27</a>). "Are you that Daniel:::?" doesn’t have to mean that Belshazzar didn’t know or recognize him; it is similar to Saul enquiring who David was after the victory over Goliath (<a href='B:90 17:55-56'>1Sa 17:55-56</a>), and David enquiring who Bathsheba was, when she was his next door neighbour and wife of his loyal friend Uriah (<a href='B:100 11:3'>2Sa 11:3</a>). To enquire who someone was must be read as a Semitic literary device, and not literally. The idea was in all these examples: ’I want you to do something for me and serve me as I ask you’.</p>


text:
<p>I have heard of you, that the spirit of the gods is in you, and that light and understanding and excellent wisdom are found in you- The wise man all claimed that they could interpret dreams because they possessed "the spirit of the gods". But their failure meant that they were charlatans, or that in fact the gods of Babylon whom they were so strongly trusting in that evening were not in fact the true God. God so often leads men to situations where they are forced to jettison their myths and favoured beliefs, and accept His truth. But in the final analysis, Belshazzar still would not do this.</p>


text:
<p>Now the wise men, the enchanters, have been brought in before me, that they should read this writing, and tell me its interpretation; but they could not show the interpretation of the thing- As noted on :14, this was a tacit admission that the gods were not in fact in touch with Belshazzar and his courtiers. But as explained on :1 and :2, they were desperately trusting those gods to deliver them from the armies outside the city walls. God was nudging Belshazzar towards total repentance, but he resisted, although accepting the theoretical truth of Daniel’s interpretation.</p>


text:
<p>But I have heard of you, that you can give interpretations, and dissolve problems; now if you can read the writing, and tell me its interpretation, you shall be clothed with purple, and have a chain of gold about your neck, and shall be the third ruler in the kingdom- As noted on :17, that kingdom was about to fall. All such rewards would be only for a few more hours at the most. Perhaps the "third ruler" meant being one of the three rulers of Dan 249, who had once been comprised of Daniel’s friends. It’s as if the king was promising to return the Jews to the places from which they had been deposed. But such symbolic repentance was too little and too late now.</p>


text:
<h4>Then Daniel answered before the king, Let your gifts be to yourself, and give your rewards to another- This was said not only because Daniel didn’t want to again be in a position where his conscience to God would be hopelessly compromised. He knew from Daniel 2 and from the writing on the wall that the kingdom of Belshazzar was about to fall. To be made third ruler in that kingdom for just a few more moments was not what anyone wanted. Daniel would have been aware of <a href='B:290 13:15'>Isa 13:15</a>, which in the context of the fall of Babylon had warned: "he that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword". As it happened, the honours were forced upon Daniel, but God recognized that this was not Daniel’s will. We too may find ourselves promoted to situations we would rather not be in, and God understands that. It is for us like Daniel to seek to remove ourselves from those situations as best we can.</h4><h4>Nevertheless I will read the writing to the king, and tell him the interpretation- The difference between reading and interpreting it would suggest that the writing was in an alphabet unknown to the king; perhaps it was in Hebrew.</h4>


text:
<p>As for you, O king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father the kingdom, and greatness, and glory, and majesty- To call Yahweh the most high was in direct criticism of the mockery of Yahweh and glorification of the Babylonian gods which had been going on. Daniel could well have been executed for this, but like Joseph and Samuel before him, he spoke forth God’s truth as he had done in Daniel 2 and Daniel 4.</p>


text:
<p>And because of the greatness that He gave him, all the peoples, nations, and languages trembled and feared before him: whom he would he killed, and whom he would he kept alive; and whom he would he raised up, and whom he would he put down- This is all the language of Yahweh Himself. But these possibilities were all given to Nebuchadnezzar by God. He had such power in order to make him later reflect that indeed, such Divine possibilities could only have been given him by God. Our experiences of exaltation are used likewise. We may reflect: ’How could I have ever::. passed that exam, held that job down, done that or this’. The experiences are given so that we may realize that it was all of God, and be humbled; but if we fail to make that realization, then we end up proud and playing God.</p>


text:
<p>But when his heart was lifted up, and his spirit was hardened so that he became proud, he was deposed from his kingly throne, and they took his glory from him- The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart was from God. Here too, the psychological attitudes of Nebuchadnezzar were confirmed by God. The spirit of God works in this way, confirming our spirit. Which is why our spirit, our mind, our deepest inner heart, is so significant. For God confirms us in it. Pride is a hardening of the spirit or the heart / mind. "They took his glory from him" would confirm what we suggested on <a href='B:340 4:32'>Dan 4:32</a>, that Nebuchadnezzar’s own courtiers robbed him of his glory rather than nursing him through a psychological illness.</p>


text:
<p>And he was driven from men, and his heart was made like an animal’s, and his dwelling was with the wild donkeys; he was fed with grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of the sky; until he knew that the Most High God rules in the kingdom of men, and that He sets up over it whomsoever He will- The humiliation was "until" he recognized the truth of the Daniel 2 image vision. But the prophecy of Daniel 4 had been that he would be in this humbled situation for a period of "seven times". We noted there that "times" is undefined; it could have referred to seven days, periods of time, weeks or years. In this sense God’s time periods are open ended and capable of redefinition. And of course Nebuchadnezzar didn’t have to repent; repentance had to be from the heart, of his choice. The "seven times" prophecy regarding Nebuchadnezzar could have been falsified by his refusal to repent, and we will see something similar in later time periods in Daniel regarding Israel’s repentance, especially in the prophecy of the sevens in Daniel 9. This is how we can have a sense of excitement with God as we read His words and consider the open ended possibilities which stretch before us.</p>


text:
<p>You, his son, Belshazzar, have not humbled your heart, though you knew all this- We are intended to learn from the experiences of others, both contemporary with us and as recorded in the Bible. As noted on <a href='B:470 21:32'>Mat 21:32</a>, the Jews of the Lord’s day were held guilty for not repenting when they saw the example of prostitutes and tax collectors repenting. We may not be humbled ourselves as Nebuchadnezzar was, but if we see others humbled, then we are expected to take the lesson and humble ourselves. The experiences of those around us are therefore not random, but brought into our lives by God so that we might learn from them. And we are held responsible for our response to them. This has very far reaching practical consequence, and gives an urgency and significance to social life of an altogether different dimension to what most experience.</p>


text:
<p>But have lifted up yourself against the Lord of heaven; and they have brought the vessels of His house before you, and you and your lords, your wives and your concubines, have drunk wine from them; and you have praised the gods of silver and gold, of brass, iron, wood, and stone, which don’t see, nor hear, nor know; and the God in whose hand your breath is, and whose are all your ways, you have not glorified- Realizing the basic truths about our nature, that we are not our own, that our fragile breath is in God’s hands, with nothing inherently immortal within us, and that our ways are "His" in that they are known to Him::. will lead us to humility and repentance. All true theology must have its issue in practice. "The God, in whose hand your breath (spirit) is" was language which pointed to how the same Angelic hand&nbsp; had written on the wall.</p>


text:
<p>Then was the part of the hand sent from before him, and this writing was inscribed- I have explained on :5 and :8 that the hand wrote the words and then the palm of that Angelic hand covered the words. Only Daniel had the power to remove that Angelic hand.</p>


text:
<p>MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN- This could be rendered: "There is counted a mina, a shekel, and two half minas"; for justification of the translation, see R:H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel p. 135. "Mene" is the word used for counting or numbering. This has more obvious connection with the interpretation of the words given in :26-28. The mina would then refer to Nebuchadnezzar, the shekel (a 50th part of a mina) to Belshazzar, who was found of little weight or account; and the two half minas would then refer to the Medes and Persians. Indeed the word "upharsin" in Aramaic sounds like "and the Persians". The repetition of the word "mene", "numbered", is another connection with the dream which Joseph interpreted for another king; it was stated twice because the fulfilment was so certain and would begin fulfilment immediately (<a href='B:10 41:32'>Gen 41:32</a>). As noted on :26-28, the original text carries the implication that these things were immediately happening. But Belshazzar only theoretically accepted that, by still trying to promote Daniel within his already ended kingdom.</p>


text:
<p>This is the interpretation of it: MENE; God has numbered your kingdom, and brought it to an end- As noted on :28, the original suggests that it has now imminently been ended, although Belshazzar’s response in elevating Daniel reflects how he only accepted the truth of these words on a theoretical and not a personal level. Numbering is a figure for the final judgment (<a href='B:220 31:4'>Job 31:4</a>), the final taking of account; but the essence of judgment day is right now, before the God who weighs and numbers actions and lives as they happen.</p>


text:
<p>TEKEL; you are weighed in the balances, and are found wanting- As noted on :26 and :28, the original implies that this was the situation at that moment. There was no desperate plea from Belshazzar for mercy, no statement of repentance, but rather he continued with life as it had been by elevating Daniel within his already ended kingdom. And this is a cameo of so much human response before God’s word. The final judgment of men is likened to a weighing in the balances (<a href='B:220 31:4'>Job 31:4</a>; <a href='B:220 31:6'>Job 31:6</a>), but the essence of judgment is going on right now in this life. "We make the answer now".</p>


text:
<p>PERES; your kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians- The original implies that this is imminently happening. But by elevating Daniel to third ruler in the kingdom, Belshazzar showed that he only theoretically acknowledged this truth, just as some terminally ill people deny the realities right up to the end. And so it is with us all; we have a tendency to think that God’s urgent word is not true quite as stated, although on another level we may genuinely accept the truth of it. The division of the kingdom could refer to it being given to both Medes and Persians, but ’division’ may more carry the sense of dividing it out, to others, just as required by the image vision of Daniel 2. We note that division is judgment; so often the enemies of Israel were judged by being divided against themselves. Those who make the Lord’s house divided are effectively working out their own judgment / condemnation. The division of the kingdom perhaps also alludes to the divided state of the kingdoms of men presented in the image of Daniel 2.</p>


text:
<p>Then commanded Belshazzar, and they clothed Daniel with purple, and put a chain of gold about his neck, and made proclamation concerning him, that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom- This response was surprising in that to give such bad news would typically have warranted immediate execution. Belshazzar humbled himself and tried to return Daniel to the three senior rulers, who had once been comprised of his Jewish friends (<a href='B:340 2:49'>Dan 2:49</a>). But Belshazzar’s humility and apparent repentance was too little and too late. To accept the truth of God’s word is not of itself enough. The way he proclaimed Daniel to a third ruler in his kingdom was of itself a tacit reflection of his inability to accept that his kingdom had been ended and given to the Medes (:28). The gold chain, purple clothing which was the insignia of the kingdom and proclamation was all so bizarre to Daniel, who knew that at that moment, the kingdom was ended. All our exaltation in this life is similarly inappropriate and meaningless. For the end of all things is at hand, and the judge stands before the door.</p>


text:
<p>In that night Belshazzar the king of the Chaldees was slain- It is hard to know whether this was by his courtiers, or as a result of the Medes entering Babylon. There may indeed be a gap of some years between the death of Belshazzar and Darius taking the kingdom (:31). Such gaps in history are found at other points in the Biblical narrative. We think of how in 1 Kings 14, Ahijah states to Jeroboam’s wife that Abijah would die, Jeroboams dynasty would be overthrown, and Israel’s kingdom ended. These things appear to all happen at the same time, when there were significant time periods between them. However, I have noted on :25-28 that the idea is that these things happened immediately, at that moment; and this leads me to support the traditional view that immediately, that night, the Medes took Babylon. This is also the implication of Jeremiah’s prophecies, that in the night of her feasting, Babylon would fall. H:P. Mansfield gives relevant support for this: "Xenophon (Cyrop. 7:5) is quoted as stating:"But Cyrus, when he heard that there was to be such a feast in Babylon in which all the Babylonians would feast and revel through the whole night, on that night, as soon as it began to grow dark, taking many men, opened the dams into the river (i:e. he opened thedykes which had been made by Semiramis and her successors to confine the waters of the Euphrates to one channel), and allowed them to again flood the country, so that he could enter Babylon beneath its walls in the channel of the river". He quotes the address of Cyrus to his army:"Now let us go up against them. Many of them are asleep; many of them are intoxicated; and all of them are unfit for battle". Herodotus (Book 1:19) states:"it was a day of festivity among them; and whilst the citizens were engaged in dance and merriment, Babylon was. for the first time, thus taken". Isaiah predicted that the gates of brass would no longer provide a defence, and that the"bars of iron would be cut asunder’"(<a href='B:290 45:2'>Isa 45:2</a>). Herodotus states that these brazen gates were situated along the banks of the river, but at the time of the attack, some of them had been left open, probably by some within the city who had come to terms with the Persians".</p>


text:
<p>Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old- "Darius the Mede" may be another name for Cyrus (so D:J. Wiseman),&nbsp; Cambyses the son of Cyrus (so Boutflower) or Gubaru, whom Cyrus appointed as governor of Babylon immediately the city fell (Whitcomb and several other prominent commentators, although this runs into difficulty at <a href='B:340 9:1'>Dan 9:1</a>). "Darius" may well be a title [meaning ’subduer’] rather than a name. The Medes took Babylon by diverting the flow of the Euphrates and entering the city along the river bed; this is the historical basis for the imagery of the drying up of the Euphrates in the last days, so that Babylon falls(<a href='B:730 16:15-16'>Rev 16:15-16</a>). The "kings of the east" of the last days therefore correspond to the hordes of various Arabian mercenaries who were used by the Medes as soldiers. We can already see the development of such groups in the Middle East today.</p>


text:
<p>It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom one hundred and twenty satraps, who should be throughout the whole kingdom- These 120 satraps were symbolized by the 120 lion statues along Babylon’s main procession street. The destruction of their representatives by lions is another inversion of Babylonian power and values which is common in Daniel. Herodotus records that "Darius" [’restrainer’] was a title for the king, an appellative like ’Pharaoh’, rather than a personal name. This may therefore be a different ’Darius’ to that of <a href='B:340 5:31'>Dan 5:31</a>. It could well be that the Darius of Daniel 6 was in fact Cyrus the Persian (see on :28). This would then fit the historical interpretation of <a href='B:340 7:5'>Dan 7:5</a>, which requires a Mede to be in power before the elevation of Cyrus. The book of Esther records 127 satraps at that time, so 120 at this time sounds right. However, the 120 could have been over the newly conquered province of Babylon.</p>


text:
<p>And over them three presidents, of whom Daniel was one; so that these satraps might give account to them, and that the king should have no loss- The elevation of Daniel would have been because it was known that he had bravely prophesied the victory of the Medes over Babylon. He was well known for this, hence his elevation; but this means that the Babylonians also would have known Daniel’s position about them, and he would have been in a similar position to Jeremiah, who likewise was within the besieged city [of Jerusalem in his case] and prophesied the victory of the enemy. These similarities between human lives all serve to give us encouragement and warning, as well as demonstrating that all is indeed under Divine control and we are not at the mercy of random event.</p>


text:
<h4>Then Daniel was promoted above the presidents and the satraps, because an excellently wise spirit was in him- This spirit perceived within him was that of God (<a href='B:340 4:8-9'>Dan 4:8-9</a>; <a href='B:340 5:11'>Dan 5:11</a>; <a href='B:340 5:14'>Dan 5:14</a>). His wisdom of spirit is elsewhere associated with his interpretation of Divine dreams; perhaps the promotion was because of this, as it was every other time he was promoted. His interpretations had of course predicted the Medo Persian victory against Babylon, and yet they also demanded their fall. Perhaps it was because of his words against Babylon that he was promoted. But it may equally have been because of his general wisdom and integrity. He was promoted several times, and each time he seems to slip out of the limelight, either by his own will or because he was manipulated out of the position. To be in any position of power within those empires would’ve involved him in conflicts of conscience to his God. We too at times need to allow ourselves to slip away from the limelight and situation provided by promotion of whatever kind.</h4><h4>And the king thought to set him over the whole kingdom- This could refer to the province of Babylon. But just as Joseph had the promotion to a similar position over all Egypt, perhaps Daniel’s integrity and evident connection with Yahweh made the king desire to give him practical responsibility for the entire empire.</h4>


text:
<p>Then the presidents and the satraps sought to find occasion against Daniel regarding the things of the kingdom; but they could find no case nor fault, because he was faithful, neither was there any error or fault found in him- The content of the Gospel is "the things [of] the kingdom" (<a href='B:510 1:3'>Act 1:3</a>; <a href='B:510 8:12'>Act 8:12</a>; <a href='B:510 19:8'>Act 19:8</a>). The kingdoms of the world at Daniel’s time are setup as fake kingdoms of God, with their leaders as an imitation Christ, an antiChrist. As ever, jealousy motivated all personal criticism of Daniel. It would have been an unpleasant experience for him, living as a foreigner amongst jealous men seeking his downfall, and all the time not wanting the exalted position anyway.</p>


text:
<p>Then these men said, We shall not find any occasion against Daniel, except we find it against him concerning the law of his God- This has remarkable implications about Daniel’s absolute integrity, for which all God’s servants should be known in their secular lives.</p>


text:
<p>Then these presidents and satraps assembled together to the king, and said to him, King Darius, live forever- All the monarchs had the idea that they were immortal and expected this to be recognized- hence the address "live forever". Nebuchadnezzar had sought to demonstrate this by making the statue of gold completely, when he was but the head of gold according to the image of Daniel 2. We note however that Daniel, despite his sensitive conscience toward his God, still goes along with this form of address (:21), even though he of all people knew from his own prophecies that the kings were far from immortal and would all come to their end.</p>


text:
<h4>All the presidents of the kingdom- This was untrue, because Daniel was one of them. The king ought to have perceived that this was a set up.</h4><h4>The deputies and the satraps, the counsellors and the governors, have consulted together in order to establish a royal statute, and to make an enforced decree, that whoever shall ask a petition of any god or man for thirty days, except of you, O king, he shall be cast into the den of lions- Darius knew full well that Daniel would be praying to his God. For Daniel prayed with his windows open toward Jerusalem in full view of everyone, "as he did previously" (:10). It was therefore known to all that Daniel did this. Darius knew that Daniel had contact with his God and had made prophecies through God’s Spirit (see on :3).</h4>


text:
<p>Now, O king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it cannot be changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which doesn’t alter- It was only by tradition that it didn’t alter. The king was all powerful. The only thing required to change it was his humility, but as we note on :9, his pride was too great. The courtiers seemed to have guessed that when it came to killing Daniel for praying to Yahweh, the king was likely to want to change; and so they remind him that this law cannot be changed. The only reason Darius would have agreed to this was because of the appeal to his pride- that he was divine, and a divine being didn’t change his principles.</p>


text:
<h4>Therefore king Darius signed the writing and the decree- As noted on :7, Darius knew full well that Daniel was in the habit of openly praying to his God, and I suggested on :7 that the king surely knew that Daniel was being set up. And yet Darius clearly respected Daniel, which was why he had promoted him, and on account of which he was so distressed when he realized that Daniel had to die. Why then did he sign the decree? A theme of Daniel is the almost unbelievable power of human pride. The king’s better judgment was overridden by his pride, and his wish to go along with his flatterers in believing the myth of his times- that he as king was in fact Divine and immortal. This had been the undoing of Belshazzar, and it had almost been the undoing of Nebuchadnezzar. We see therefore the power of human pride and what happens if we succumb to flattery and the human tendency to play God. Our better judgment and spiritual side is flattened beneath the weight of it. Darius acts in accordance with how the other monarchs in the book of Daniel are presented- they could have repented and were given the chance to, they theoretically accepted the truth of God’s prophetic word and personally respected Daniel; but their pride stopped them from accepting the basic truth of the image of Daniel 2, that they too would pass, they were not eternal, were men and not God, and needed to accept the reality of God’s Kingdom and resign their own kingdoms.</h4><h4>In the same way as they could have repented, they could also have restored captive Judah to their land, and thus helped re-establish the Kingdom of God in Israel. Cyrus is presented by name in Isaiah as a Messiah-like figure who could have orchestrated this, by destroying Babylon and empowering Jewry to return. If the Darius in this chapter was indeed Cyrus as suggested on :1 and :28, then we see how far he failed to realize what was potentially possible. He gave the decree to allow Judah to return in the first year of his reign (<a href='B:150 1:1'>Ezr 1:1</a>); but now he seems to have faltered and become consumed with pride so that he didn’t live up to his potential; and Judah likewise failed to grasp the Divinely presented opportunities, with the majority of them preferring to remain in captivity.</h4>


text:
<h4>When Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he still went into his house (now his windows in his room were open toward Jerusalem) and he kneeled on his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did previously- He prayed toward Jerusalem with reference to how Solomon had said that Israel in their sin and captivity would pray toward the temple (<a href='B:110 8:33'>1Ki 8:33</a>; <a href='B:110 8:35'>1Ki 8:35</a>; <a href='B:110 8:38'>1Ki 8:38</a>; <a href='B:110 8:44'>1Ki 8:44</a>; <a href='B:110 8:48'>1Ki 8:48</a>). Daniel was deeply aware of the sin of Judah and felt it as being his own sin; his prayer in Daniel 9 is full of such identification with Israel’s sins. He felt that duty towards his weak and sinful brethren as stronger than his own fear of a miserable death. He saw this as a Divine command which although not explicitly expressed as a command, is effectively a commandment because it is so strongly implied as necessary for us. This incident is surely thebasis of <a href='B:510 5:29'>Act 5:29</a>: "We ought to obey God rather than men". Many Jews surely consoled themselves that prayer is a private matter, and wouldn’t have advertised their prayers, certainly not by opening their windows and praying on their knees in full view of religious informers. But Daniel was willing to die for the sake of how important he felt prayer to be. And he challenges us all in this, we who so often are guilty of praying when overtired, or spending ou time on petty things until we have no time left to pray. Our time budget needs to give prayer serious priority, at whatever loss- even of life itself, according to Daniel’s example. To pray regularly three times / day, perhaps as David did at dawn, noon and unset (<a href='B:230 55:17'>Psa 55:17</a> cp. <a href='B:510 10:9'>Act 10:9</a>) required no small discipline. He had a demanding job and life situation, just as David did. His requirement for time to pray regularly was therefore advertised to his contemporaries; it was no secret. This is such a challenge to those in demanding careers; it is no more the done thing to take time out to pray than it was for Daniel, living as he did in an environment where leadership was connected to religion, and he was clearly out of step with the surrounding religious views.</h4><h4>Solomon’s prayer, to which Daniel is alluding, required prayer to be made specifically toward the temple in Jerusalem. But that temple lay in ruins. Daniel’s prayer toward it therefore reflected his understanding that God’s presence doesn’t dwell in temples made with hands. "That is true" (literally "the thing is true", as AV) is the very term used of the truth of Daniel’s prophetic revelations (<a href='B:340 7:16'>Dan 7:16</a> - remember that the visions of Daniel 7 were given before this time, see <a href='B:340 7:1'>Dan 7:1</a>). If this "Darius" is indeed Cyrus, then we note that in his third year, Daniel received another vision, "and the thing was true" (<a href='B:340 10:1'>Dan 10:1</a>). But Darius would not humble himself before the truths of God and change his perceived truth, just as we and many others struggle to.</h4>


text:
<p>Then these men assembled together, and found Daniel making petition and supplication before his God- The petition and supplication (the idea is of "grace") was surely for the revival of Judah’s fortunes with the re-establishment of God’s Kingdom in Israel, and the fulfilment of the prophecies of the restoration. But Daniel knew that due to Judah’s weakness, this would have to be by grace, and thanks to the intercession of a righteous remnant represented by himself. This was for Daniel more important than his personal death. "Before his God" suggests that the presence of God was just as much there in a room in Babylon as it was in Zion.</p>


text:
<p>Then they came near, and spoke before the king concerning the king’s decree: Haven’t you signed a decree, that every man who shall make petition to any god or man within thirty days, except to you, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions? The king answered, That is true, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which doesn’t alter- Now was the moment when the king could say: ’Yes I did, but I was wrong, I am not going to have Daniel killed. Mock me as you will, assume that I cannot actually be divine because I am now changing my position, but change it I will’. And he doesn’t do that. His pride was too great, although at one and the same time, as the text often implies, he had a level of faith and spirituality. But human pride is so strong.</p>


text:
<p>Then they responded and said to the king, That Daniel, who is of the captives of Judah, doesn’t respect you, O king, nor the decree that you have signed, but makes his petition three times a day- "That Daniel" indicates how they despised him. This is the extreme power of human jealousy. "Doesn’t respect you" was just what the courtiers had eagerly told Nebuchadnezzar when the three friends refused to bow to his image in Daniel 3. Darius ought to have learnt from Divine history and perceived that he was being set up for a major fall. But he refused to join the dots, just as we do, because his pride made him act illogically in spiritual terms.</p>


text:
<p>Then the king, when he heard these words, was very displeased, and set his heart on Daniel to save him; and he struggled until the going down of the sun to save him- This struggle or ’labouring’ may perhaps have involved consultations with legal experts, but more likely it refers to the internal struggle within him against his own pride. And the fact he didn’t command Daniel’s release shows that he lost it; his pride was stronger than his humility and displeasure with himself ("sore displeased with himself", AV).</p>


text:
<p>Then these men assembled together to the king, and said to the king, Know, O king, that it is a law of the Medes and Persians, that no decree nor statute which the king establishesmay be changed- "These men" had the upper hand over the king, but only because they knew that his pride was such that he could not retract the law. The same happened when Herod refused to retract his oath and had John the Baptist murdered. This is the power of human pride; it can bring down the most powerful person.</p>


text:
<h4>Then the king commanded, and they brought Daniel, and cast him into the den of lions- Being cast to the lions and preserved may therefore be used in <a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a> and <a href='B:670 5:8'>1Pe 5:8</a> in a figurative sense, encouraging us to see ourselves as in Daniel’s shoes and likewise preserved.</h4><h4>Now the king spoke and said to Daniel, Your God whom you serve continually, He will deliver you- Service to God is here paralleled with prayer. Those who lament their apparent inability to do much physical service should remember this. Prayer is no less a service to God. I have suggested that Darius did on one level believe, but his pride squashed his spirituality. We see his more spiritual side expressed here, weak though it was; he believed that God would deliver Daniel. We note too that Darius knew full well that Daniel prayed / served his God "continually". His signing of the decree was therefore done in the full knowledge that it would affect Daniel. I don’t think he was simply an elderly man who was fooled and manipulated by his courtiers. Rather was he like us, knowing truth on one level, and yet allowing his pride on the other hand to lead him to decisions of a moment which he would later bitterly regret. This seems to me the more likely and imaginable understanding of why he signed the decree. By admitting that Daniel’s God could save Daniel whereas the king could not, Darius was tacitly accepting that he was not God, and his acceptance of prayer solely to himself was therefore wrong. But as with Belshazzar and Nebuchadnezzar initially, his repentance didn’t go far enough. His apparently solid faith that God would deliver Daniel contrasts with his query in :20. Again we see repeated a feature of all the monarchs in the book of Daniel- they displayed spirituality, faith and humility for moments, but like us, found it hard to maintain their intensity.</h4>


text:
<h4>A stone was brought, and laid on the mouth of the den; and the king sealed it with his own signet ring, and with the signet ring of his lords; so that nothing might be changed concerning Daniel- The situation has evident similarities with the sealing of the Lord’s tomb (<a href='B:470 27:66'>Mat 27:66</a>), after Pilate like Darius before him allowed his pride to override his better judgment. It could be that Darius wanted his lords and himself to take total responsibility, and believed that God would deliver Daniel (:16) and their collective power and authority would thereby be declared as null and void. But by doing so we could also understand that even at the very end, he still lacked the required humility to disassociate himself from the execution.</h4><h4>&nbsp;As explained on :10, Daniel had risked his life to pray for Judah and confess their sins because he felt so identified with them. Being placed in a grave to die was a response to that; for he was suffering the punishment upon Judah, who were figuratively "cut off in the dungeon" with a stone barring their escape (<a href='B:310 3:53'>Lam 3:53</a>). In this again we see a pointer forward to the Lord Jesus, whose death and burial was likewise an act of identity with His people.</h4>


text:
<p>Then the king went to his palace, and spent the night fasting; no musical instruments were brought before him: and his sleep fled from him- The Aramaic word for "palace" can also mean ’temple’. We again meet the theme of the Babylonian religious system being trounced and declared powerless. The lack of sleep recalls the parallel situation in <a href='B:190 6:1'>Est 6:1</a>; circumstances repeat in history, because it is the same Divine hand at work. It is our wisdom to perceive this, and to conclude that man is never alone, never in an unprecedented situation. This is the purpose of Biblical history. The king’s fasting was presumably in order to beg God to deliver Daniel. If he had humbled himself, then he could simply have released Daniel. We see here how things so often turn out; he had a lower level of spirituality because he wouldn’t take the highest level, which was to simply release Daniel as Pilate could have released the Lord. But the point is, he did fast to God, and even through his own weakness, God urged him closer to Himself. We marvel at God’s patience and desire to work with all men, even the proud, to bring them to Himself.</p>


text:
<p>Then the king arose very early in the morning, and went in urgency to the den of lions- Again we see the conscience of the king at work. He was not disinterested. See on :18.</p>


text:
<p>When he came near to the den to Daniel, he cried with a lamentable voice; the king spoke and said to Daniel: Daniel, servant of the living God, is your God, whom you serve continually, able to deliver you from the lions?- His apparently solid faith that God would deliver Daniel in :16 contrasts with this query. Again we see repeated a feature of all the monarchs in the book of Daniel- they displayed spirituality, faith and humility for moments, but like us, found it hard to maintain their intensity. "The living God" is a term used to differentiate the one true God from the idols (<a href='B:510 14:15'>Act 14:15</a>; <a href='B:590 1:9'>1Th 1:9</a>). We see here the progress in his thinking. His night of fasting to Daniel’s God led him to believe that the one "living God" was Daniel’s God and not his idols. We would likely have given up in disgust with Darius, after he sacrificed Daniel’s life for the sake of his proud agreement to play God. But God worked with him, and brought about this undoubted spiritual progress in the man.</p>


text:
<p>Then Daniel said to theking, O king, live forever- The LXX reflects the ambivalence of the terms used: "O King, I am alive!". But I suggested on :6 that despite his sensitive conscience, knowing that all these kings would be deposed, Daniel went along with this form of address. We too have to make decisions as to whether we shall ’go along’ with incorrect ideas and behaviour, or make a point, as Mordecai did by not bowing to Haman. Sometimes Daniel did make a point, e:g. regarding eat meat offered to idols; on this point, which didn’t directly concern him personally, he didn’t. See on :26. It could also be that Daniel used the term "O king, live forever" but understood it in his own way, namely that he wished that the king would repent and thereby live forever in God’s eternal kingdom.</p>


text:
<h4>My God has sent His angel, and has shut the lions’ mouths- The shutting of the mouth of the pit by men is contrasted with the Angel shutting the mouths of the lions. Daniel’s faith in this would have been developed by his knowledge of what had happened to the three friends in the furnace. This is how friendship and fellowship in Christ should work in our days- the experiences and deliverances of others become our pattern and inspiration. See on :23. It was Daniel’s faith which stopped the mouth of lions (<a href='B:650 11:33'>Heb 11:33</a>); but he says that it was God who shut them. We see here how faith makes us as it were workers together with God; what we believe in, He does, to the point that therefore we, as it were, do it. This is the level of intimacy possible between God and faithful man.</h4><p>And they have not destroyed me; because before Him innocence was found in me; and also before you, O king, have I done nothing wrong- The Lord’s innocence was likewise the basis of His ’resurrection’ (<a href='B:510 2:24'>Act 2:24</a>). Perhaps Daniel inspired Paul, who wrote of how he too was delivered from lions (<a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a>) and who likewise claimed to be innocent before God and man (<a href='B:510 24:16'>Act 24:16</a>). Daniel was no mere Sunday School or Synagogue story for him, and neither should it be for us; we are to see ourselves in Daniel and be inspired to act in faith likewise.</p><h4>One part of our message is of the Kingdom of God; we should be living witnesses to the current rulership of God over our lives, and thereby we testify with credibility and integrity to the future establishment of that Kingdom on earth at the Lord’s return. If we are living the eternal life, the Kingdom life, then we are in ourselves advertisements for the good news of the Kingdom. Daniel is an example of this. The Aramaic verb habal occurs several times in Daniel, and between them we build up a picture of how Daniel was a living witness to the Kingdom. The word means to hurt / destroy. We find that the Kingdom of Babylon was to be cut down and destroyed; whereas the Kingdom of God was to never be destroyed (<a href='B:340 4:23'>Dan 4:23</a>; <a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>). The mouths of the lions were closed so that they did not "hurt" [s:w. ’destroy’] Daniel (<a href='B:340 6:22'>Dan 6:22</a>); and because of this, Darius praises God, saying that His Kingdom would never be ’destroyed’ (<a href='B:340 6:26'>Dan 6:26</a>). Daniel was not destroyed; and thus Darius came to believe that God’s Kingdom would not be destroyed. Because Daniel was set up as a living part and foretaste of that Kingdom. To a far greater extent, "the Kingdom of God" is a title given to the Lord Jesus- because He in His mortal life was the essence of that Kingdom, the embodiment of the Kingdom life.</h4>


text:
<p>Then was the king exceeding glad, and commanded that they should take Daniel up out of the den. So Daniel was taken up out of the den, and no kind of harm was found on him, because he had trusted in his God- Again we see a similarity with the deliverance of Daniel’s friends from the furnace, upon whom no smell or trace of fire was even found. See on :22.</p>


text:
<p>The king commanded, and they brought those men who had accused Daniel, and they cast them into the den of lions, them, their children, and their wives; and the lions mauled them, and broke all their bones in pieces, before they came to the bottom of the den- This breaking in pieces connects with the image prophecy, where the little stone crushes to pieces the kingdoms of men. The historical incidents in the book of Daniel were all evidences that the larger Divine program would just as surely come to fulfilment. Such punishment of men with the very experience they intended to inflict upon others is in accordance with God’s law (<a href='B:50 19:11-13'>Deu 19:11-13</a>; <a href='B:50 19:19'>Deu 19:19</a>; <a href='B:50 24:16'>Deu 24:16</a>), and the whole scene is presented as analogous to the destruction of the rebels in the wilderness (<a href='B:40 16:32'>Num 16:32</a>). Perhaps Darius had been made aware ofGod’s law through the preaching of Daniel; to have agreed to destroy Daniel because of his pride therefore makes his failure all the more serious. And God’s continued grace and patience with him all the more wonderful.</p>


text:
<p>Then king Darius wrote to all the peoples, nations, and languages, who dwell in all the earth: Peace be multiplied to you- This copied Nebuchadnezzar in making a multi-lingual declaration of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God to all peoples. That the king had power to unilaterally do this further indicates that he was not as weak and manipulated as some like to make out. He was proud and powerful, that was the problem. His power to do this suggests further that this "Darius" was not "Darius the Mede" who would not have had such wide authority.</p>


text:
<h4>I make a decree, that in all the dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear before the God of Daniel; for He is the living God, and steadfast forever, His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed- Perhaps the king is alluding to how he was usually addressed "O King, live forever"; and he now recognizes that he is not in fact Divine, and only Daniel’s God lives for ever. See on :21. He is accepting the truth of the image of Daniel 2. He was clearly aware of passages like <a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>, but had previously resisted the implications of the message. Now he accepted it and preached it to all peoples. The similar vision of the four beasts was given before this incident (<a href='B:340 7:1'>Dan 7:1</a>), and the king likely was aware of the same teaching expressed there- that God’s Kingdom alone would be eternal, and would triumph over his empire.</h4><h4>And His dominion shall remain to the end- This could simply mean ’eternally’. But perhaps this passage is behind Paul’s explanation of how the Lord Jesus delivers the Kingdom to God the Father at "the end" (<a href='B:530 15:24-26'>1Co 15:24-26</a>).</h4>


text:
<h4>He delivers and rescues, and He works signs and wonders in heaven and in earth, He who has delivered Daniel- This suggests that Darius realized that Daniel’s deliverance was only one of many ongoing miracles and activities of God in "heaven and in earth" at that time. He recognized the wider hand of God in human affairs. Darius is here using the words of Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:340 4:3'>Dan 4:3</a>); perhaps he was trying to make a similar repentance, inspired by the example of a previous monarch who had likewise encountered Daniel. The examples of repentance we see and read of in others are intended to inspire us to repentance (see on <a href='B:470 21:31-32'>Mat 21:31-32</a>).</h4><h4>From the power of the lions- Darius may also have in view how Daniel’s enemies were as a den of lions to him, which is how the figure is used in <a href='B:330 22:25'>Eze 22:25</a>.</h4>


text:
<p>So this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, and in the reign of Cyrus the Persian- The identity of Darius is problematic; this could be a way of saying "Darius, who was Cyrus the Persian". But Darius is specifically called a Mede, although perhaps this is a way of saying that he now called himself a Persian.</p>


text:
<h4>The Beasts of Daniel 7</h4><p>The four metals of the image of Daniel 2, followed as they were by the feet and ten toes part of iron and clay, are matched by the four beasts of Daniel 7, culminating in the beast with ten horns, which is also destroyed by the second coming of Christ. It is emphasized that Nebuchadnezzar ’saw’ the image, or literally, he had a vision of it (<a href='B:340 2:26'>Dan 2:26</a>; <a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>; <a href='B:340 2:34'>Dan 2:34</a>; <a href='B:340 2:41'>Dan 2:41</a>; <a href='B:340 2:43'>Dan 2:43</a>; <a href='B:340 2:45'>Dan 2:45</a>). The same word is used in Daniel 7 of how now Daniel ’saw’ or ’had a vision of’ the four beasts (<a href='B:340 7:1-2'>Dan 7:1-2</a>; <a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>; <a href='B:340 7:6-7'>Dan 7:6-7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:9'>Dan 7:9</a>; <a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>; <a href='B:340 7:13'>Dan 7:13</a>; <a href='B:340 7:21'>Dan 7:21</a>). The Daniel 7 vision or ’seeing’ was perhaps from God’s perspective, Heaven’s view of the same realities which Nebuchadnezzar saw from an earthly perspective. There are many verbal similarities, as well as the general outline similarity between the four kingdoms. Thus the intention of the Daniel 2 image was to show how God ‘sets up kings’ who ‘rise up’ (<a href='B:340 2:21'>Dan 2:21</a>; <a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>; <a href='B:340 2:39'>Dan 2:39</a>), and the same word is used of how both the lion and the bear are ‘set up’ or ‘raised up’ (<a href='B:340 7:4-5'>Dan 7:4-5</a>); indeed, all four beasts “are four kings which shall arise out of the earth” (<a href='B:340 7:17'>Dan 7:17</a>). The kingdoms of Daniel 2 reigned over the earth, and that clearly refers to the eretz promised to Abraham, Israel, rather than the entire planet. Daniel 7 makes the point that these kings or kingdoms will arise out of that same ‘earth’ which they later dominate. Clearly we are not to look for any identification of the beasts or kings from outside the land promised to Abraham.</p><p>The ten horns likewise represent “ten kings” which shall “arise” (<a href='B:340 7:24'>Dan 7:24</a>); and although it is not stated specifically, we are to assume that they arise also out of the same area, the “earth” / land. &nbsp;We should therefore be looking for a group of four kings / kingdoms, out of which arise ten kings / kingdoms; and out of them arises one “little horn” in particular. Revelation’s take on the beasts adds more detail- there are also seven heads, a false prophet acting as publicity agent for the beast, a whore riding the beast, sitting on seven hills / kings. The four beasts / kings are initially in conflict, striving with each other upon the sea, and arising from that comes the fourth beast entity, the composite beast including elements of all the previous ones. And from that there arises the ten horns and one little horn. We should not, however, think of these situations as having to be chronological developments, i:e. first the four, then the fourth beast, then the ten horns, then the little horn. It may work out like that, but not necessarily. The precise details need not concern us ahead of time; the picture is of a series of leaders and powers involved in the domination of the land promised to Abraham. The fact is, the beasts will all exist together in the last days, just as the metals of the image will. These various entities will “arise” from the land. And this is what we see happening already- in the last few years there has been what is called the Arabic, and particularly Sunni, sahwa, ‘awakening’. Powers and kings have risen up out of the scrubland and desert of the eretz, united in their hatred of Israel, but bitterly divided against each other.</p><p>We are for sure in the stage of the winds / ruach / Angel controlled nations ‘striving’ with each other- the eretz is full of conflict as never before, not just between Israel and her neighbours, but between those neighbours. There are currently four non-Jewish nations within the eretz- Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. But they exist just on paper as lines on the map; there are other significant entities within the area, e:g. Kurdistan, the Islamic State, Gaza, parts of Egypt and Turkey [depending how one defines the northern border of Israel], parts of Saudi Arabia [depending how the eastern border is defined]. In total they make ten kingdoms, but the number ten may not be literal. We would then be awaiting for the “little horn” to arise- a charismatic, antiChrist leader, or perhaps another very small entity. For the horn is called the little horn, and yet it is the most powerful in the very last days. However, the Hebrew and Aramaic words translated “little” can mean ‘short’ in terms of time as well as size. The idea may be that it lasts a very short time indeed, maybe literally days or hours in the very last day, and is the human representative of the beast / horns who personally challenges the Lord Jesus and is destroyed by the brightness of His coming.</p><p>The Origins of the Beasts</p><p>The empires of Daniel 2 dominate the earth. The Hebrew eretz can refer either to the entire planet, or to the land- the land promised to Abraham, the land of Israel, from the Euphrates to the river of Egypt. The dominion of the four beasts is therefore over the same area. Daniel saw the beasts arising out of the great sea. This could be a reference to the laver, which is also called a ’sea’ (<a href='B:110 7:23-26'>1Ki 7:23-26</a>; <a href='B:110 7:39'>1Ki 7:39</a>). This was a huge circular bowl for washing which was set upon 12 bronze oxen, representing the 12 tribes of Israel. They were arranged in four groups of three, facing north, south, east and west, in imitation of the camp of Israel in the wilderness. The beasts therefore arise out of the territory promised to the twelve tribes of Israel.</p><p><a href='B:730 17:15'>Rev 17:15</a> interprets waters or seas as "peoples". The beasts therefore arise out of the peoples who are to be found in the land of the 12 tribes of Israel. The interpretation is confirmed by the words of the Angel in <a href='B:340 7:17'>Dan 7:17</a>, who says that the four beasts who arise out of the sea are four king[dom]s which "shall arise out of the earth / land".</p><p>Another possibility regarding the "great sea" is that it refers to the area of Babylon’s dominion. The vision of Daniel 7 clearly parallels that of Daniel 2, which was intended to explain what would happen after the Babylonians. The arena of the "great sea" was to be dominated by other kingdoms apart from Babylon. In confirmation of this, we find the word rab ["great"] used about the greatness of Babylon ("great Babylon", <a href='B:340 4:30'>Dan 4:30</a>; <a href='B:360 2:2'>Joe 2:2</a>; <a href='B:360 2:11'>Joe 2:11</a>). But rab is also translated "master" (<a href='B:340 1:3'>Dan 1:3</a>), "lord", "captain", "chief" (<a href='B:340 2:10'>Dan 2:10</a>; <a href='B:340 2:14'>Dan 2:14</a>; <a href='B:340 2:48'>Dan 2:48</a>), "master" (<a href='B:340 4:19'>Dan 4:19</a>; <a href='B:340 5:11'>Dan 5:11</a>). We could understand the "great sea" as the sea of nations ruled over by the master, the lord of the sea, the king of Babylon- and Daniel is seeing this vision in the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon (<a href='B:340 7:1'>Dan 7:1</a>). As in the Daniel 2 vision, Daniel is explaining that the leadership of Babylon will not last, other kingdoms will arise to also dominate the sea of nations which was then under Babylon’s sole control. This again pushes us towards understanding the entire vision as specifically concerning the area over which Babylon had dominion, and not the whole planet.</p><p>Let’s not get caught up with the idea that Israel shall survive and defeat the invaders in her own strength. The beast must dominate Israel. Jerusalem will be taken. <a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>; <a href='B:340 7:21'>Dan 7:21</a> speaks of how the beast made war with the saints and prevailed against them- Israel- until the Ancient of days came; in <a href='B:340 7:23'>Dan 7:23</a> he devours the whole land [as a beast] and shall tread it down. The beast of Revelation is so powerful in the earth / land that "the world" wondered at it and at the whore riding it (<a href='B:730 13:3'>Rev 13:3</a>; <a href='B:730 17:6-7'>Rev 17:6-7</a>), feeling unable to make war with it. This of itself requires the demise and degrading of America, Europe and the West generally. <a href='B:340 11:41'>Dan 11:41</a>; <a href='B:340 11:45'>Dan 11:45</a> are likewise clear about the latter day King of the North: “He shall also come into the glorious land… He shall plant the tents of his palace between the sea and the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him”.</p><h4>-------------</h4><p><a href='B:340 7:1'>Dan 7:1</a></p><p>In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon- This was about 10 years before the fall of Babylon. As with all Bible prophecy, there was a short term initial fulfilment which guaranteed that the larger picture would likewise finally come true.</p><h4>Daniel had a dream on his bed: then he wrote the dream and told the conclusion of the matters- The entire vision of the beasts of Daniel 7 is summed up in <a href='B:340 7:1'>Dan 7:1</a>: "the rosh of the words" (AV "sum of the matter"). And the rosh surely refers to the individual of <a href='B:330 38:2'>Eze 38:2</a> who will lead the latter day armies against Israel. The whole system of beasts is summed up in an individual rosh or leader, just as the metals of the image in Daniel 2 are in the form of a man with the face of Nebuchadnezzar. The little horn of Daniel 7 is actually called "the beast": "I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame" (<a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>).</h4>


text:
<p>Daniel spoke and said, I saw in my dream and, behold, the four winds of Heaven broke forth upon the great sea- This again is a deconstruction of Babylon’s religion; the Enuma Elish describes the god of Babylon, Bel (or Marduk) using four winds to destroy sea monsters and become god of gods. This narrative is subverted so that Yahweh is to be recognized as God of all gods.</p>


text:
<h4>Four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another- This again is a subversion of the entire narrative of Babylon, for the walls of the Ishtar Gate were decorated with identical great beasts, who were said to defend Babylon. They would all come to their end beforeIsrael’s God. The nations represented by the beasts come from the earth, the eretz or land promised to Abraham (:17). The imagery of the sea may therefore simply be because there is a deconstruction going on- as explained on :2, the god of Babylon was supposed to have dominated the monsters of the sea in order to become the supreme god.</h4><p>Wild beasts were the threatened punishment upon Israel for their sin. So we are to expect the dominion of these beasts to be over the land and people of Israel. And this is what the metals of the image of Daniel 2 speak of likewise- dominion over the earth / land of Israel. Indeed, the ancient world often spoke of the arising of beasts as punishment for breaking a covenant (evidence provided in G:W. Buchanan, The Book of Daniel p. 167). And Israel had broken covenant; and these were the judgments to come upon them. The point is, the dominion of these beasts was to be over Israel; that is the focus of the vision, not Europe nor the rest of the planet.</p><h4>Daniel saw this vision at the very end of the Babylonian empire, in the reign of Belshazzar (:1), whom Daniel 5 presents as the last king of Babylon. But he sees the beasts, including the first beast [which is clearly based upon historical Babylon] arising from the sea. Yet Babylon had already arisen at the time of the vision, and was waning in power. This underlines the fact that the essential fulfilment of this vision is in the last days, for all the beasts exist together then just as all the metals in the image exist, to be broken by the Lord’s return. Whatever historical fulfilments there were, the vision speaks of entities arising in the very last days to abuse God’s people and be destroyed by the coming of His Son.</h4>


text:
<h4>The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings- Both lion and eagle are symbols of Babylon (<a href='B:300 49:19-22'>Jer 49:19-22</a> cp. <a href='B:310 4:19'>Lam 4:19</a>; <a href='B:350 8:1'>Hos 8:1</a>; <a href='B:420 1:8'>Hab 1:8</a>). They are also associated with Islam; Ali, Mohammad’s on in law, is called "The lion of God, always victorious". The plucking of the wings could refer to Nebuchadnezzar’s loss of power. <a href='B:300 49:19-22'>Jer 49:19-22</a> specifically calls Nebuchadnezzar the lion, and his soldiers the eagles. The primary potential fulfilment of the vision was in matching the four metals of Daniel 2, which spoke primarily of four kings rather than kingdoms which were to arise. A lion with eagles’ wings would have appeared like a sphinx, a monster assumed to be a demonic being. The point is that all that was considered demonic and radically evil was all the same under Divine control and manipulation; there is no radical evil in creation. This is why the New Testament uses the language of demons when describing the Lord’s miracles, which clearly showed that whether or not demons actually exist, they are of no power compared to God.</h4><p>I saw until its wings were plucked- Maybe a reference to the mental illness of Nebuchadnezzar, or the decline of the empire after his death. I have suggested several times on Daniel 2-6 that the various monarchs had the opportunity to repent and restore the Jews, and to resign their own kingdoms under the Kingdom of God they were allowing to be re-established in the form of the kingdom of Judah. But they all failed in this. The lifting up of the plucked lion would therefore refer to how after Nebuchadnezzar’s final repentance, the kingdom could have been lifted up and glorified. Whether or not Nebuchadnezzar maintained his repentance to the end of his days we don’t know, but his kingdom and successors didn’t. And so their kingdom likewise had to fall.</p><p>And it was lifted up from the earth, and made to stand on two feet as a man; and a man’s heart was given to it- The lifting up from the earth / ground may simply mean that this beast becomes like a man. The first beast, representing Babylon, had "the heart of a man". It was the embodiment of an individual person- Nebuchadnezzar. The latter day Babylon likewise will be centred around a person- the antiChrist figure of the last days, who in turn will profess to be the incarnation or embodiment of the false prophet Mohammed. What happened here is the reverse of what happened to Nebuchadnezzar (<a href='B:340 4:16'>Dan 4:16</a>; <a href='B:340 4:33'>Dan 4:33</a>). It could be that we have here a potential prophecy, of what could have happened after Nebuchadnezzar’s repentance after his years of mental illness, living as a beast. The beasts are represented as having human features because like the metals of the image, the primary possibility of the prophecies was that Nebuchadnezzar would be followed by a series of kings rather than kingdoms, which would climax in the revelation of Messiah and the re-establishment of the Kingdom. That didn’t happen, but it was the potential, which Judah’s spiritual indolence disallowed.</p><h4>Nebuchadnezzar in his madness became as a beast- with a body like a beast, hair like an eagle, and nails like those of a beast (<a href='B:340 4:33'>Dan 4:33</a>). This language is all used about the beasts in the later prophetic parts of Daniel’s prophecy. They had features of eagles (<a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>), bodies of beasts (<a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>), and remarkable nails or claws (<a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a>). Nebuchadnezzar became like such a beast because the latter day beast would be the embodiment of him, just as the image of Daniel 2 had the face of Nebuchadnezzarand was in the form of a man. The beast is epitomized by a man- "the number of the beast:::is the number of a man" (<a href='B:730 13:18'>Rev 13:18</a>).</h4>


text:
<h4>Behold, another beast, a second, like a bear; and it was raised up on one side- The original could mean "half crouching", or standing on its hind legs, ready to pounce in attack. The historical application could be to the Medes arising and then the Persians, hence it appears to have two sides to it.</h4><h4>And three ribs were in its mouth between its teeth: and they said thus to it, Arise, devour much flesh- "Arise" is a command to the beast to stand up as a man, on two feet. As noted on :4, these beasts are all epitomized in a man, the latter day antiChrist figure who is based upon Nebuchadnezzar. The "three ribs", the remnant of other beasts devoured by this beast, encourage it to stand up as a man and devour even more flesh; to do to others, as had been done to them. The three ribs could refer to the conquering of Lydia, Egypt and Babylon by Medo-Persia; or to the three great Assyrian cities of Nineveh, Calah, and Resen which they sacked. But it’s hard to understand how their remnants encouraged Medo-Persia to devour others. The relevance to Lydia, Egypt and Babylon was therefore but a primary fulfilment; the vision, like that of Daniel 2, speaks primarily of the last days, in the same way as the entire image of Daniel 2 [the basis of Daniel 7] stands complete in the last days.</h4>


text:
<h4>After this I saw, and behold, another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it- The four heads could suggest a looking to expand in all directions. The historical application would be to the kingdom which succeeded Babylon. But I have explained that just as the image of Daniel 2 stands complete in the last days, so all the beasts likewise exist on the eve of the Lord’s return (:12). They can refer to different aspects of the latter day entity which dominates the land promised to Abraham. The fact Daniel saw them successively arise is on one level just the furniture of the vision, and doesn’t have to mean that there will be a chronological sequence of entities in the last days. There will be an element of four wings and heads in this particular manifestation of the latter day beast.</h4><h4>Historically, the leopard could refer to the lightning speed of the Persian troops, if the bear is understood as Media. The four heads / wings would then refer to the first four Persian kings, from Cyrus to Xerxes. Or it could refer to the lightning speed of the Greek ascendancy to power in the region under Alexander the great and his four generals, Ptolemy, Seleucus, Philip, and Antigonus; who may each be represented by the four wings and heads. Unless the generals are represented by the heads, and the wings speak of the four divisions of the Greek empire: Greece, Western Asia, Egypt, and Persia / India. The problem with all these historical interpretations is that they fail to meet the required criteria- that the vision of the beasts, like that of the image in Daniel 2, concern domination of the eretz promised to Abraham and not areas far outside of it such as Greece and India. The similarities are at best vague, and the main fulfilment will become clear in the latter domination of the eretz by an entity which includes all these previous elements. It should also be remembered that in <a href='B:730 17:13'>Rev 17:13</a>, horns represent kings, and heads represent mountains or kingdoms. Whether the four heads can represent Persian kings or parts of the Greek empire is therefore questionable, especially as the Greek conquests were not established as kingdoms under a king. The decorum of the symbolism requires that the wings and the heads are different in their meaning; four wings would suggest two pairs of wings. It may simply be allusive to the double winged beasts which were the classic symbols of Babylon and Assyria, as if to say that there were elements of their abuse of Israel in this beast.</h4>


text:
<h4>After this I saw in the night visions, and, behold, a fourth beast, awesome and powerful, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth; it devoured and broke in pieces- This is what the little stone of <a href='B:340 2:34'>Dan 2:34</a>; <a href='B:340 2:45'>Dan 2:45</a> does. This entity tries to execute judgment which only God should, and which He will do in the return of His Son to earth. This playing God is a significant factor in the judgment of these latter day entities.</h4><p>And stamped the residue with its feet: and it was diverse from all the beasts that preceded it; and it had ten horns- This beast was a composite beast, including the elements of the former beasts. It would have appeared very similar to Marduk, god of Babylon. Just as the image of Daniel 2 stands complete in the last days, headed up by a latter day Nebuchadnezzar, so this final beast is Babylon revived.</p><h4>The difference between devouring and then stamping the rest with its feet could suggest that this entity was not content merely with conquering, but destroyed [stamped upon] the rest which it could not conquer. This is hard to fit to any particular historical entity, but it complements the general impression we get of the latter day entity conquering the eretz of Israel and then causing destruction to the surrounding peoples. Such a scenario can easily be imagined given the current nature of things in the Middle East. The stamped bits of beast, as it were, would then correspond with the brief final part of the Daniel 2 image, a mixture of metal mixed with clay. That is how the Middle East will end up, and the Lord’s return will be in judgment upon that final phase of the Daniel 2 image and the mess left by the fourth beast.</h4>


text:
<h4>I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them another horn, a little one- As explained in the introduction to this chapter, this appears to speak of an individual who arises, the antiChrist, who deposes others in order to establish himself as the personal epitomy of the fourth beast, which in turn is the composite of all the beasts. It is this individual who faces off against the real Christ at His second coming and is judged by His appearance on earth (:9). The horn / king was "little", and the original may mean one who has been diminished. The one made little arises or ’comes up’ to be the greatest, an imitation Christ. It could be that this individual has been humiliated in some previous conflict, but now arises again. This could be associated with the way the beast received a deadly wound but was healed (<a href='B:730 13:3'>Rev 13:3</a>; <a href='B:730 13:12'>Rev 13:12</a>).</h4><h4>Before which three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots: and behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things- The plucking up of three horns (= kings, <a href='B:340 7:24'>Dan 7:24</a>; <a href='B:340 8:20'>Dan 8:20</a>; <a href='B:730 17:12'>Rev 17:12</a>) by such a dominant individual is hard to conclusively prove as having been historically fulfilled. It has a latter day application which is yet to become clear. This ndividual king is as it were the personification of the beast. He arises in the last days and will be alive at the time of the Lord’s return. This simply doesn’t fit a Pope being given three states in Italy. The horns are kings, not kingdoms. Mountains or kingdoms are heads not horns (<a href='B:730 17:9'>Rev 17:9</a>). The destruction of the little horn simply cannot refer to the supposed "loss of temporal power of the papacy" in 1870. This individual is destroyed by the Lord’s return and not some generations previously. And he is destroyed by the Lord’s return, not some European individual of bygone centuries.</h4>


text:
<p>I saw until thrones were placed, and One who was the ancient of days sat: his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of His head like pure wool; His throne was fiery flames, and its wheels burning fire- There is an abrupt change from the earthly realities of :8, which are recorded in prose, to this poetic [in Aramaic] description of the Divine throne and judgment. This abrupt change is intentional; to get the point over, that the situation on earth is going to be dramatically, suddenly changed by the Lord’s return. The thrones were "placed" or as AV "cast down". The kings and kingdoms of men are to be destroyed by the Lord’s coming, just as the little stone destroys all the metals. The kingdoms of men become those of the Lord Jesus (<a href='B:730 11:15'>Rev 11:15</a>). The ambiguity between ’placing / imposing’ and ’throwing down’ is because the placing of God’s throne is upon the casting down of human thrones. The "thrones" plural may be an intensive plural referring to the one great throne, sat on by "Him" singular (:10). Or the plural may be because it is the thousands of elohim, the judged and persecuted people of God, who now as it were sit on the Lord’s behalf to judge their persecutors.</p>


text:
<h4>A fiery stream came forth from before Him- The original for "stream" is only elsewhere used about "the river", Euphrates. Now the forces represented by that river are to be judged. But the equivalent Hebrew idea is repeatedly used for how the nations were to flow as a river to Jerusalem (<a href='B:290 2:2'>Isa 2:2</a>; <a href='B:290 60:5'>Isa 60:5</a>; <a href='B:300 31:12'>Jer 31:12</a>; <a href='B:400 4:1'>Mic 4:1</a>). The harder side of God strangely attracts. As the judgments flow out of Zion, so the peoples flow towards it. When God’s judgments are in the earth / land, its inhabitants come to learn righteousness (<a href='B:290 26:9'>Isa 26:9</a>).</h4><p>Thousands of thousands ministered to Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him- These are not myriads standing before Him to receive judgment, but the myriads of the seed of Abraham who now as it were sit with Him in judgment upon their persecutors. ’Standing before’ is being used as a parallel to ’ministering’.</p><h4>The judgment was set, and the books were opened- The Lord Jesus returns to earth with the Angels. They play a part in the final judgment. The placing of thrones (:9) and the sitting of the judgment is likely metaphor, part of the idea of the thrones / kingdoms of the world being subsumed beneath God’s throne / Kingdom. I discussed on :9 that the "Him" may refer to the Lord Jesus personally, but it could be that the plural "thrones" mean that God’s people now sit in judgment upon their persecutors, with their representative Angels now physically with them.</h4>


text:
<p>I saw at that time because of the voice of the great words which the horn spoke; I saw even until the beast was slain, and its body destroyed, and it was given to be burned with fire- The destruction of the beast is spoken of immediately after introducing the little horn. That horn&nbsp; or leader is presented as the personification of the beast, the whole evil system of its day and previous generations all represented in one person. Thus the words of the horn call forth the beast’s destruction; it will be the ultimate case of being condemned for the sake of words (<a href='B:470 12:37'>Mat 12:37</a>), and the Lord applies that principle as warning to us all. The language suggests that it was the words of the horn which led to the beast’s destruction. There will be teaching and claims made by the horn which are the most blasphemous ever; there was something dramatically noteworthy about them. The</p>


text:
<p>As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time- Just as all the metals of the image exist together when the little stone [Messiah] comes to earth and destroys them, so all the beasts likewise exist together at the time of His coming. The taking away of all human dominion surely speaks of their being subsumedbeneath God’s eternal kingdom. But their lives bring prolonged for a period, a season [a period until a Jewish feast?] and a time [a year?], may be in order to give them the chance of repentance. The original word for "Prolonged" only occurs elsewhere in <a href='B:340 4:27'>Dan 4:27</a>, where Daniel urges Nebuchadnezzar to repent so that there might be a lengthening or prolonging of his life. This connection should serve to guide us in interpreting this prolongation of their personal lives after their political destruction; it will be in order to help these terrible abusers of God’s people to repent. Such is God’s earnest desire to bring all men unto repentance, and we should share in that Spirit today.</p>


text:
<p>I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of the sky One like a son of man, and he came up to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before Him- Those who bring the "son of man" [Jesus] before the "ancient of days" [God] are surely the Angels. They received Him out of the sight of the disciples in Acts 1 and as it were introduced Him to Heaven. This ’coming of the Son of Man’ is clearly understood as the second coming (<a href='B:470 24:27'>Mat 24:27</a>; <a href='B:470 24:30'>Mat 24:30</a>; <a href='B:470 24:37'>Mat 24:37</a>; <a href='B:470 24:39'>Mat 24:39</a> etc:). Just as at His ascension, the Lord was introduced to the Father and in the court of Heaven, given all dominion; so at His second coming He is likewise given from God the moment and authority to now take this dominion unto Himself in actual terms on earth.</p>


text:
<h4>There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed- This is the equivalent of the little stone becoming God’s eternal Kingdom on earth in <a href='B:340 2:44'>Dan 2:44</a>. The purpose of the Kingdom becoming God’s is so that people from all nations, languages etc. should serve Him. It is not merely a taking power for the sake of it. The language here is therefore at the basis of the great commission, to even now make this same appeal to all nations. The Kingdom of God is a case of now but not yet. We proclaim it worldwide right now, in the spirit in which it shall be proclaimed at the Lord’s return. Because the Kingdom is to spread world-wide, we should therefore spread the Good News of this coming Kingdom world-wide. In prospect- and no more than that, let it be noted- the Kingdom has been established in that the Lord Jesus Christ has all power in Heaven and earth (<a href='B:470 28:18'>Mat 28:18</a>). This is the language of <a href='B:340 7:14'>Dan 7:14</a> concerning the future Kingdom. The believer must live the Kingdom life now, as far as possible (<a href='B:520 13:12-13'>Rom 13:12-13</a>). At the establishment of the Kingdom, we will be spreading the Gospel throughout this planet. In this life too we should live in the spirit of the Kingdom in this regard.</h4><h4>The great commission of&nbsp; Matthew 28 has evident reference to <a href='B:340 7:14'>Dan 7:14</a>, where the Son of Man is given authority and power over all so that people of all nations, races and languages should serve Him. We must remind ourselves that out of the 5,000 or so languages in the world, the vast majority have no true Christian representatives; and only about half of them have the Bible in their own language. And as of the year 2001, only 12% of the world have English as a first or second language; yet the majority of our community are English speaking. We have a long way to go in fulfilling this. Either that, or the scope of God’s acceptance of men from all these languages and nations over time and over space today is far wider than we as a community have thought. However, I personally am driven instead to understand that the Truth of Christ must be taken into literally all the world by our community in these last days:&nbsp; <a href='B:730 5:9'>Rev 5:9</a> presents us with the picture of men and women redeemed from every kindred [tribe / clan], tongue [glossa- language], people [a group of people not necessarily of the same ethnicity] and nation [ethnos- ethnic group, lit. ‘those of the same customs’]. This means that, e:g:, not only redeemed ‘Yugoslavs’ will stand before the throne in the end; but Macedonians, Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Montenegrans, Bosnians:::every ethnic group, with every custom, will have representatives who will have believed the Truth and been saved.</h4>


text:
<p>As for me Daniel, my spirit was grieved in the midst of my body, and the visions of my head troubled me- Daniel was not merely relaying a Divine message. He was deeply concerned at the content. As the Psalmist was "pricked in my reins", so the grief of Daniel for his people was deeply internal; this was no passing feeling of ’Oh what a pity it is that more won’t hear the Truth’. He was grieved in the midst of his body. He had hoped for the restoration of the Kingdom of God in his lifetime; and now he feared that in fact it would be terribly delayed to well beyond his time. And he grieved for that. Even after he was given the interpretation, his spirit remained grieved (:28). So the grief was not because he didn’t have the interpretation, but essentially because he figured thatIsrael’s kingdom was not to be restored during his lifetime, and his people must yet suffer the more.</p>


text:
<h4>I came near to one of those who stood by- Presumably an Angel. He was given the vision surrounded by Angels standing by him. In :10 we read of myriads of Angels and their charges ’standing by’; Daniel was as it were transported forward in time to the day of the Lord’s coming back to earth.</h4><h4>And asked him the truth concerning all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things- We see here the basic principle, that God’s truth is revealed to those who wish to know it. It is not immediately apparent; hence the Lord used parables so that those who wanted a quick obvious message wouldn’t find it. But those who asked Him for the interpretation received it. This is why some find the Bible hard to understand- exactly because they do not truly seek to understand it, nor can they humble themselves to recognize that without Divine help, we cannot of itself properly understand the Divine words we read or hear.</h4>


text:
<p>These great animals, which are four, are four kings, who shall arise out of the land- They dominated the land / eretz from which they arose. Their provenance was from the eretz. They are to be understood as powers which arise from within the territory of the land promised to Abraham, and come to dominate it. This makes many of the continuous historical interpretations of the beasts at best primary fulfilments. The major fulfilment is yet to come, and the situation within the eretz now helps us see that this can realistically happen soon. We note the beasts were "four kings" rather than ’kingdoms’. This would look ahead to four such rulers arising in the last days. Perhaps there was a potential fulfilment in three or four kings arising after Nebuchadnezzar, climaxing in the re-establishment of Israel’s Kingdom; and Daniel lived through the reigns of that many monarchs. But du to lack of repentance, that scenario didn’t happen. The fulfilment is therefore in the last days. Seeing all the beasts exist together at the time of the end (:12), we need not think that there must be a chronological sequence of four leaders who arise. They are aspects of the same entity, viewed from different angles. The fact Daniel has to describe them in chronological order and saw them perhaps one after another doesn’t mean that they have a chronological fulfilment. This is the tendency of Greek, linear thinking. But here we are reading Hebrew apocalyptic, which places little stress upon linear chronology.</p>


text:
<p>But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever- Daniel would have understood these "saints" as God’s people, Israel, who would be the ones persecuted in the last days by the beast system (:25). "Come inherit the Kingdom prepared for you" perhaps alludes here. The same term is used of how Darius "took the kingdom" (<a href='B:340 5:31'>Dan 5:31</a>). Maybe even there, "the kingdom" refers to the kingdom of Israel. Because the prophetic theme in Daniel is that the various metals and beasts had dominion over the kingdom of Judah and the land promised to Abraham, and this was to be surrendered to Messiah at His appearing. Eternal possession naturally alludes to the promises to Abraham, that his seed would inherit the eretz for ever (<a href='B:10 17:8'>Gen 17:8</a>; <a href='B:10 22:17-18'>Gen 22:17-18</a>). That eretz was "the kingdom" they would eternally inherit.</p>


text:
<p>Then I desired to know the truth concerning the fourth beast, which was so different from all of them, exceedingly terrible, whose teeth were of iron, and its nails of brass; which devoured, broke in pieces, and stamped the residue with its feet- The brass claws weren’t mentioned in the initial description. Iron and brass were metals within the image of Daniel 2. The idea is that this beast is a composite of all the previous beasts, just as the image as a whole is a composite of all the different metals which were within it. "The residue" is literally ’the remnant’ and is used of the remnant of Judah who had survived the Babylonian invasion (<a href='B:150 6:16'>Ezr 6:16</a> "the rest of the children of the captivity"; <a href='B:190 9:16'>Est 9:16</a>; <a href='B:290 10:20-22'>Isa 10:20-22</a>; <a href='B:290 11:11'>Isa 11:11</a>; <a href='B:290 11:16'>Isa 11:16</a>; <a href='B:290 28:5'>Isa 28:5</a>). But the more immediate reference in the context is to the "rest" or remnant of the previous beasts (:12 s:w:). The fourth beast tramples those who remain of the other beasts and those who remain of the Jews, and parts of them (the iron and brass) as it were stick to this fourth beast, becoming part of it. This produces the brief element of the image upon which the Lord returns- a weak mixture of clay and iron shards which has been trampled down. For breaking in pieces and trampling would be the only way to actually produce such a situation. We can expect an absolute bloodbath in the eretz promised to Abraham, and the scene for that is now set.</p><h4>describes the fourth beast as having the iron and brass metals of the image of Daniel 2 in it. The fourth beast had feet and teeth, we are specifically told. The lion, representing the head of gold, had feet (<a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>); the bear, representing the breast of silver, had powerful teeth. The fourth beast has “claws of brass”, but brass referred to the third empire in the sequence of empires in the parallel Daniel 2. The point being, that the fourth beast has elements of the previous beasts in it. And likewise, the final entity which dominates Israel at the time of the Lord’s return in glory will have within it elements of all the previous dominators. Thus the fourth beast had all the characteristics of the other beasts. By it being destroyed through its ten horns being smitten by Christ’s return, it is as if the image of Daniel 2 is standing erect and complete in&nbsp; the last days, being hit on the ten toes (cp. the ten horns of the beast) by Christ’s return.</h4><p>Various Possible Outcomes</p><p>The four beasts are described as “diverse” from each other (<a href='B:340 7:3'>Dan 7:3</a>). The Aramaic word translated “diverse” is used 21 times, and every time it distinctly means to be changed from one state to another. It is used about ‘altering’ a king’s word (<a href='B:150 6:11'>Ezr 6:11</a>; <a href='B:340 3:28'>Dan 3:28</a>), the face of a man being ‘changed’ from one appearance to another (<a href='B:340 3:19'>Dan 3:19</a>; <a href='B:340 5:6'>Dan 5:6</a>). The idea is not simply that there were four beasts which were different from each other; it’s surely axiomatic that four different beasts are going to be different from each other. The beasts of Daniel 7 are clearly related to the metals of the image in Daniel 2; but this is not to say that the same thing is being said simply through different symbolism. That would be relatively pointless. There is an extension of the ideas and a modification of the way in which the final end [the establishment of God’s Kingdom on earth] will be achieved. I have suggested in the appendix that Daniel’s prophecies were conditional; a sequence of four kings could have arisen after Nebuchadnezzar, culminating in the establishment of the Kingdom on earth. Daniel’s long life spanned the 70 years captivity of Judah and the reign of at least four kings; the prophets repeatedly state that the intention of that captivity was that the captives might “know that I am Yahweh”; the experience was to be God’s pleading with His people to repent (<a href='B:330 20:36'>Eze 20:36</a>). Daniel wrote his visions for others to read, indeed it is specifically mentioned that he spoke out loud the Daniel 7 vision (<a href='B:340 7:1'>Dan 7:1</a>). The visions were part of that pleading with the captives to accept God’s perspective and join in on the side of His Kingdom. But Israel, as a whole, would not. Most of them preferred the soft life in Babylon and did not return at the time of the restoration. They would not “know Yahweh” nor did they repent- instead, as Ezekiel 18 makes clear, they blamed their captivity upon the sins of their fathers being visited upon them by an unjust God. Because of this lack of response, the possible outworking of the visions changed.</p><p>The passing of power from Babylon to the Medes could have continued according to the Daniel 2 vision; four kings could have arisen (note they are called ‘kings’ and not ‘kingdoms’ in <a href='B:340 7:17'>Dan 7:17</a>), and the Kingdom of God would have been established at the end of the 70 years captivity. But there were delays because of the Jews’ lack of response. Hence Daniel’s sorrow and shock throughout the book as he saw the final outworking being delayed. Therefore the fact the beasts are ‘changed’ or ‘altered’ is seamlessly in context with this idea of delayed and recalculated outcomes of the prophecies. This would explain why the further visions of the beasts in Daniel 8 suggests that in the time of the third kingdom [the Greeks], a charismatic leader would arise [clearly having Antiochus Epiphanes in view] who would be destroyed by the coming of God’s Son and the establishment of His Kingdom on earth. But that scenario also didn’t work out, and Antiochus Epiphanes became a prototype of the final antichrist, requiring a gap between that part of the prophecy and the last days. Perhaps this is why Daniel’s first vision in Daniel 7 is of the first three beasts, and then “After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast” (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>)- as if the vision of the first three beasts was separate to that of the fourth beast. Likewise at the end of Daniel 11, the king of the north is clearly Antiochus Epiphanes throughout the chapter; but 11:40- 12:5 clearly envisages him standing up against “Michael” and being destroyed at the time of the resurrection of the dead. This didn’t happen, and so there arose a hiatus in fulfillment. This is not to say that God’s word is falsified; rather is it proved ultimately true in a way which takes on board human freewill. For otherwise, the very existence of God’s prophetic word would be deterministic of human behavior to an extent that human freewill is taken away by the very existence of the Divine word.</p><h4>It’s noteworthy that the vision of Daniel 7 is presented as seven separate visions, each introduced by the rubric “I saw” (7:2,4,6,7,9,11,13). Revelation is an expansion upon Daniel’s visions, and there we find seven visions which are in turn subdivided into seven visions and some of those subdivisions even are subdivided into seven visions. Admittedly, these can be defined in various ways, but some of the more obvious ones are: 7 visions:</h4><p>1) Revelation 4 to 8:1</p><p>2) <a href='B:730 8:2-11'>Rev 8:2-11</a></p><p>3) Revelation 12to14</p><p>4) Revelation 15, 16</p><p>5) Revelation 17, 18</p><p>6) Revelation 19</p><p>7) Revelation 20</p><p>The seven visions of conflict explaining the Establishment of God’s Kingdom between <a href='B:730 11:15'>Rev 11:15</a> to <a href='B:730 13:8'>Rev 13:8</a>:</p><p>1. The woman with child: the birth of Jesus, 12:1-2</p><p>2. The great red dragon: the enemy of Peace, 12:3-6</p><p>3. The war in heaven: the Cross, 12:7-12</p><p>4. The dragon, the woman, and her children: the struggle of God’s people, 12:13-17</p><p>5. The seven-headed beast from the sea: the power of Rome, 13:1-4</p><p>6. The war against the saints: persecutions, 13:5-10</p><p>7. The beast and his mark: corruption of the emperor and the dragon’s agents, 13:11-18</p><p>Then there are the Seven Visions of Mt. Zion, <a href='B:730 14:1-20'>Rev 14:1-20</a>; the Seven Bowls of the Wrath of God, <a href='B:730 15:1'>Rev 15:1</a> to <a href='B:730 16:21'>Rev 16:21</a>;the Seven Visions of the Fall of Babylon, <a href='B:730 17:1'>Rev 17:1</a> to <a href='B:730 19:10'>Rev 19:10</a>; the Seven Visions of Recompense, <a href='B:730 19:11'>Rev 19:11</a> to <a href='B:730 21:5'>Rev 21:5</a>.</p><p>The point is that the outline scenario of Daniel 7 is repeated in more detail in Revelation. But the primary reference remains the same- a prediction of a final time of trouble within the land promised to Abraham, which will come to term in the return of Christ to earth to establish His Kingdom upon the ruins of Israel’s enemies.</p><p>The Four Beasts and the Cherubim</p><p>It’s apparent that the four beasts are full of allusion to the cherubim vision seen by Ezekiel- also whilst in captivity in Babylon, just as Daniel was. The cherubim were likewise four separate living creatures [beasts] which somehow were also one. The four beasts of Daniel 7 become comprehended in the fourth beast and in the one composite beast of Revelation 13, which includes all elements of the previous beasts within it. Note that the Hebrew / Aramaic for “beast” means literally a living one- the living creature of the cherubim vision. The cherubim featured the faces of lion, ox, man and eagle (<a href='B:330 1:10'>Eze 1:10</a>), and lion, ox and eagle feature in the descriptions of the four beasts; the ‘man’ element is found in that the lion has the heart of a man, and the little horn of the fourth beast has the eyes of a man. The first living creature has wings which are lifted up from the earth (<a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>)- which is precisely the language of the cherubim wings being lifted up from the earth in <a href='B:330 1:19'>Eze 1:19</a>; <a href='B:330 1:21'>Eze 1:21</a>; <a href='B:330 10:16'>Eze 10:16</a>; <a href='B:330 10:19'>Eze 10:19</a>. As the first beast is made to stand on its feet (<a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>), so the cherubim caused Ezekiel to stand on his feet (<a href='B:330 2:2'>Eze 2:2</a>; <a href='B:330 3:24'>Eze 3:24</a>). The second creature had a “side” which was “lifted up” (<a href='B:340 7:5'>Dan 7:5</a>), as the cherubim likewise had ‘sides’ which were ‘lifted up’ (<a href='B:330 1:8'>Eze 1:8</a>; <a href='B:330 1:20'>Eze 1:20</a>). The third beast had four wings as each of the living creatures / cherubim did (<a href='B:340 7:6'>Dan 7:6</a>; <a href='B:330 1:23'>Eze 1:23</a>). The first and fourth beasts / living creatures have feet (<a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>; <a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>) as the cherubim do (<a href='B:330 1:7'>Eze 1:7</a>). The description of how these living creatures / beasts will be judged by the Lord Jesus includes language also used inEzekiel’s cherubim visions- One seated upon a throne, wheels of burning fire (<a href='B:340 7:9'>Dan 7:9</a>).</p><p>Ezekiel’s vision was surely well known to Daniel. The connection is surely that throughout the course of human history, especially the course of Gentile domination of the land of Israel, the glory of God shone through it all, it was all going according to His purpose; and the various beasts were in fact manipulated by the living creatures of the Angel cherubim. Daniel 7 says this in different terms by opening with the statement that the four spirits / Angels of Heaven were responsible for the uprising of the four beasts (<a href='B:340 7:2-3'>Dan 7:2-3</a>). Events were not just taking their course, with everything spinning out of control; but rather, God through the Angels was powerfully in control. And His glory shone through the apparent cruelty, shame and randomness of the events that appeared to be happening to His land and people.</p><p>The great comfort is that these four beasts are reflected in <a href='B:350 13:7-8'>Hos 13:7-8</a>, where God threatens that He will be to Israel like a lion, a leopard, a bear and a wild beast. All these beasts are significant because of what they do to Israel; that is the territory and arena of their domination. But they are all acting as it were on God’s behalf, like the four beasts of the cherubim. There is no radical evil, evil out of control in the cosmos, with God’s people at risk from being dominated by it. God is completely in control, and even the terrible things done to Israel by the beasts are under His total control.</p><p>If we are looking for a power or ideology within the land promised to Abraham which focuses upon the destruction of Israel, then we do not have far to look. Islam explicitly encourages Moslems to attack Israel and force Jews to either convert to Israel or be killed: Consider these passages from the Hadith: "You will fight against the Jews and you will kill them until even a stone would say: Come here, Muslim, there is a Jew (hiding himself behind me); kill him" (Book 41:6981). Book 19:4366 likewise: "I will expel the Jews and Christians from Arabia and will not leave any but Muslim". The ’Arabia’ here is often interpreted as the Arabian Peninsula, but that was probably not in Mohammed’s perceptual geography. By ’Arabia’ he meant ’the lands where the Arabs live’, and that area includes Israel, inhabited as it is by several million Palestinian Arabs.</p><p>The Eclipse of the West</p><p>However we interpret the fourth beast and its horns, the point has to be accepted that it is radically different to any entity or empire which has ever dominated the earth / land of Israel before. It was "terrifying and dreadful and exceedingly strong::. it devoured and broke in pieces and stamped what was left with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it" (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>). It is this same beast which led John in Revelation to be staggered and amazed. For such an entity to dominate Israel in the last days, the current geopolitical situation must change. The West will be powerless to stop it. The historical support of Israel by the West, and their continual involvement on the ground in the Middle East to avert catastrophe and protect their interests there::. will end. This could be because of their financial collapse, or an oil / energy stranglehold over them,&nbsp;or the uprise of domestic forces allied with Islam which leave them powerless to get involved; or maybe they genuinely turn against Israel.</p><p>Or perhaps the beast entity is in possession of military technology, just as Goliath was, which leads to the sense that nobody can make war with this beast: "Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make war with him?" (<a href='B:730 13:4'>Rev 13:4</a>). And if ’all’ that is required for peace is to let these guys have their way with Israel::. well, that will be a price which will seem cheap compared to the unleashing of nuclear, germ, chemical or some other kind of technology against the West. "Who is like unto the beast?" suggests that it is felt that nobody is comparable with the beast in order to make war with it; there is a superiority of military ability which is perceived which results in recognizing that this entity cannot be challenged. The language is very much of David and Goliath. The current dependency of Israel upon military technology to maintain the upper edge over their enemies must therefore come to an end. All those scenarios are well on the way to development. Nuclear technology is already in the hands of Iran, and can spread easily to irresponsible hands. It would also be typical of Russian foreign policy to spite the West by arming the West’s enemies with such technology. Without the West as the power broker in the Middle East, such an entity will surely arise. The release of the restrained horsemen on the banks of the Euphrates may refer to this restraining influence being removed (Revelation 9, 16). The growth of the IS shows the potential for it, if nothing else. So the very prediction of such an entity arising in the land promised to Abraham has some radical implications for the West.</p><p>Judah’s invasion by the Babylonians is clearly a type of the latter day invasion by the Islamic entity or state. The Biblical record emphasizes Judah’s sense of betrayal, in that her lovers and friends [i:e. other nations] had not come to her aid as they had promised and as she had hoped (Lamentations is full of such language). This has its counterpart today, in that Israel depends upon the West to be the power broker deflecting any major strike against them by the Islamic powers around them. But that factor will be removed, the promises and undertakings will not come true- because the Biblical picture is of a huge state in power over Israel without opposition.</p><p>The Horns on the Beast</p><p>The ten horns represent ten kings- the reference may be to individual leaders rather than to nations (<a href='B:340 7:24'>Dan 7:24</a>). They arise out of the head of the beast, maybe implying they share the same overall ideology or thinking. That ideology would be that of hatred of Israel and a common desire to destroy her- which rather suggests Islam. That is the only appropriate ideology within the earth / land promised to Abraham which could be the candidate for the fulfilment of this prophetic requirement.</p><p>The overall picture presented by the descriptions of the horns is of conflict with each other, whilst at the same time dominating the earth / land of Israel. The little horn ‘subdues’ [to abase / humiliate / degrade] three of the horns, and according to <a href='B:730 17:16'>Rev 17:16</a>, the ten horns hate the whore, the individual riding the beast entity, and bitterly destroy and burn her. And the fortunes of the entire entity ebb and flow- one of the wounds has a deadly wound but revives, the beast itself has a deadly wound from a sword but revives (<a href='B:730 13:3'>Rev 13:3</a>; <a href='B:730 13:12'>Rev 13:12</a>; <a href='B:730 13:14'>Rev 13:14</a>), the beast was, is not and yet is (<a href='B:730 17:8'>Rev 17:8</a>), and we are beginning to see this ebb and flow of the fortunes of the entity developing in the land / earth. This is precisely the picture that has more recently unfolded in the land promised to Abraham- a series of increasingly powerful and aggressive leaders and powers, morphing together from the perspective of Israel and God’s people into a system of abuse such as has never been seen and never will be. And yet from another viewpoint, they are bitterly divided against themselves.</p><h4>The tendency is to want to clearly identity each of the ten toes / ten horns of the fourth beasts, the wings of the lion, the three ribs in the mouth of the second beast, the four wings and four heads of the third beast, the three horns who are plucked up by the little horn of the fourth beast, and then in Revelation we have seven heads found on the beast, as well as the ten horns, who in Revelation “hate the whore” and burn her; and the whore who rides the beast sits on seven hills or kings. Each of these attributes [toes, horns, wings, heads] refer to kings / kingdoms. Looking at the scenarios through half closed eyes, as it were, not sweating the details, we have the impression of a latter day entity dominating the earth / land promised to Abraham, which is comprised of a bewildering array of smaller powers and charismatic leaders who are often pitted against each other. This is exactly the position we see developing in that geographical area. We don’t need to interpret the fine details ahead of time- that is not how prophecy functions. When it all happens, then it will be clear. What we are seeing is the general picture developing- an array of aggressive powers, some strong and some weak, broadly grouped into four groups, matching the four beasts who will exist in the last days. They are all united around a desire to dominate Israel. It’s not hard to imagine how they will destroy each other, which is God’s preferred method of judging His people’s enemies.</h4><p>The Little Horn</p><h4>The changing of times and laws by the antichrist figure of <a href='B:340 7:25'>Dan 7:25</a> sounds like the radical Islamist desire to impose the Islamic calendar and sharia law in the land promised to Abraham, which they see as their caliphate; and for sure, if Israel becomes part of an Islamic state, then the keeping of the Jewish calendar will be outlawed. The implementation of sharia law and changing legal structures to reflect it, is a major theme in their program. It’s clear that the three and a half year domination of Jerusalem and changing of the Jewish law and calendar had an initial fulfilment in the abuses of Antiochus Epiphanes, who desecrated the temple. There was a three and a half year period from the edict of Antiochus in June 168 BC to the rededication of the temple in December 165 BC:&nbsp; The little horn of Daniel 8 comes out of the Greek kingdom, but the horn of Daniel 7 out of the fourth kingdom. I suggest that this is because the prophecy could have been fulfilled totally at the time of Antiochus- Messiah could have come and destroyed him. But the various required preconditions weren’t met, and so there was another possibility of it coming true out of the Roman kingdom [another possibility is that the four beasts and metals refer to Babylon-Media-Persia-Greece rather than Babylon-Medo Persia-Greece-Rome]. Revelation uses the same imagery to describe the antiChrist of the last days, who will incorporate some elements of the previous historical fulfilments of the little horn in men like Antiochus Epiphanes.</h4>


text:
<p>And concerning the ten horns that were on its head, and the other horn which came up, and before whom three fell, even that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spoke great things, whose appearance was more aggressive than its fellows- This horn can be understood as vaguely relevant to Antiochus Epiphanes, and also Vespasian in AD70 (see on :24). The prophecies had various primary fulfilments over time, each of which pointed forward to the major fulfilment which is yet to come, where the latter day horn will have all the features of its previous historical incarnations. The great and blasphemous things spoken by this horn would be associated with the changing of Divine times and seasons by the same horn which we read of later.</p>


text:
<h4>) but they play out before the court of Heaven the situation on earth. Later in Daniel we find Angels likewise representative of kings and kingdoms (<a href='B:340 10:13'>Dan 10:13</a>; <a href='B:340 10:20'>Dan 10:20</a>). The comfort is that God is aware of all that happens on earth, and in fact He orchestrates it. The situation on earth is therefore not ultimately spinning out of control. My point in this context is that the four beasts strive with each other and do not naturally bond with each other. This is the same situation as we find in the feet and toes made part of iron, part of clay, mixed with each other but not cleaving to each other. Just as the image stands erect in the last days in order for it to be destroyed, so the sequence of beasts which we have in Daniel 7 are not simply a historical outline of a sequence of empires. Each of them exists in some form in the last days, and are united together in their brief domination of the earth / land promised to Abraham. The first three beasts stand ’before’ the fourth one, the original meaning ’in the presence of’, rather than previously in chronological terms (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>). The fourth beast has its body destroyed, although the other beasts are also present there and have their lives prolonged "for a season" (<a href='B:340 7:11-12'>Dan 7:11-12</a>). The historical interpretation of the beasts is not irrelevant, however. The final entity dominating Israel will incorporate aspects of all the previous systems which have dominated the land promised to Abraham.</h4><p>The Fourth Beast</p><p>The fourth beast with the ten horns equates with the legs or iron and ten toes of the image of Daniel 2. This entity will be in existence at the time of Christ’s return, because it is to be destroyed by His coming. And we have that same picture in Revelation. Historically, the legs of iron represent Rome, but the beast is not a historical entity, it exists in the last days. So although there are parallels and outline similarities between the metals of the image and the beasts, this is not to say that they are all one and the same. The final beast has elements of all the previous beasts, it is a composite entity including all the elements of the previous systems which have dominated the land and people of Israel. Just as the image stands complete in the last days, so the final beast stands complete. The whore sits on many waters, representing various languages and peoples; and yet she sits upon the beast (<a href='B:730 17:1'>Rev 17:1</a>; <a href='B:730 17:3'>Rev 17:3</a>; <a href='B:730 17:15'>Rev 17:15</a>). The latter day beast is therefore not one nation but an amalgam of peoples.</p><p>As the entire image was "terrible" (<a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>), so the fourth beast system is described with the same word (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>). As the image appeared “excellent” (<a href='B:340 2:31'>Dan 2:31</a>), so the strength of the fourth beast was ‘excellent’ (s:w. <a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>). <a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a> emphasizes that this final beast is altogether more aggressive than any previous beast / dominator of the land: "Dreadful, terrible, strong exceedingly::. it was different from all the beasts that were before it". The original word translated “dreadful” suggests whoever sees it slinks away in fear- its strength and advantage over others is “exceeding”. This is the same awe we find in Revelation 13, where the world looks on at the beast, marvelling at this entity and feeling that nobody can even begin to make war with him. This speaks of an entity that is more aggressive and fear-inspiring than the aggressive Babylonians, Assyrians or abusive Nazis. It implies too the eclipse of the West as the dominant world power block and power broker. The Islamic jihadists may develop into an entity which fits this bill- a reign of terror involving cutting off children’s heads and parading their actions on videos, live crucifixion of any who don’t agree with them, but with a stranglehold advantage over any critics::. The same radical difference between this final beast and all previous ones is brought out by the way in which John, after all he had earlier seen, was in shock at the way the beast drunk the blood of the saints, i:e. the people of God, Israel in their land (<a href='B:730 17:6'>Rev 17:6</a>). The whole world likewise is in shock horror at this beast (<a href='B:730 13:3'>Rev 13:3</a>; <a href='B:730 17:8'>Rev 17:8</a>). The Islamic jihadists haven’t yet struck so much fear into everyone, but the time is surely coming. <a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a> puts it this way: "There shall be a time of trouble such as never was" for God’s people, and they will be saved from it by the standing up of Jesus for His people, the resurrection of the dead and the destruction of the "king of the north". The "time of Jacob’s trouble" from which he shall be saved (<a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a>) must be understood in the context of how the phrase "time of trouble" is used in the Bible to describe times of Israel’s invasion and suffering at the hands of their neighbours (<a href='B:290 33:2'>Isa 33:2</a>; <a href='B:300 2:27-28'>Jer 2:27-28</a>; <a href='B:300 8:15'>Jer 8:15</a>; <a href='B:300 11:12'>Jer 11:12</a>; <a href='B:300 11:14'>Jer 11:14</a>; <a href='B:300 14:8'>Jer 14:8</a>; <a href='B:300 14:19'>Jer 14:19</a>; <a href='B:330 7:7'>Eze 7:7</a>). "There shall be a time of trouble such as never was" therefore suggests a time of abuse of Israel such as has never been seen. And this includes the Nazi holocaust, the death camps of Europe, the Babylonian and Assyrian atrocities::. It’s purely wishful thinking to hope that the IDF and Israel’s military technology will stave this off. It will not. Jerusalem is to be taken and the women raped (<a href='B:450 14:2'>Zec 14:2</a>). The beast is to dominate the earth / land of Israel.</p><h4>The "iron teeth" of the beast (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>) can be connected with the way that "Damascus" tore the Israelites with teeth of iron (<a href='B:370 1:3'>Amo 1:3</a>). Damascus is a key player in the future Islamic state which is to be established in the land promised to Abraham. There will be an element of the historical Syrians in the entity which finally dominates Israel. And we can clearly see that in the Islamic jihadists. The same figure of a beast with huge teeth closing in upon Israel is to be found in <a href='B:360 1:6'>Joe 1:6</a>, describing the Babylonian and / or Assyrian invasion of the land. Teeth like lions are also mentioned in the picture of men with long hair arising like aggressive locusts out of the earth / land to torture to death those who live there for five months (<a href='B:730 9:4-8'>Rev 9:4-8</a>). This very much sounds like the long haired jihadist fighters of the IS briefly dominating the land at the end. But they are part of the beast system, which includes this element of teeth because it is a composite figure including all elements of Israel’s persecutors.</h4><p>The beast will "devour" the land (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>), just as the historical Babylon ’devoured’ Jerusalem with fire (<a href='B:300 30:16'>Jer 30:16</a>; <a href='B:310 4:11'>Lam 4:11</a>; <a href='B:330 15:5'>Eze 15:5</a>; <a href='B:330 19:12'>Eze 19:12</a>; <a href='B:330 23:25'>Eze 23:25</a>; <a href='B:350 8:14'>Hos 8:14</a>; <a href='B:370 1:4'>Amo 1:4</a>; <a href='B:370 2:5'>Amo 2:5</a>) and the Assyrians devoured the land (<a href='B:300 50:17'>Jer 50:17</a>; <a href='B:350 11:6'>Hos 11:6</a>; <a href='B:350 13:8'>Hos 13:8</a>; <a href='B:360 1:4'>Joe 1:4</a>; <a href='B:360 1:19-20'>Joe 1:19-20</a>; <a href='B:360 2:3'>Joe 2:3</a>; <a href='B:360 2:5'>Joe 2:5</a>; <a href='B:360 2:25'>Joe 2:25</a>). All these verses use the same word translated ’devour’ in <a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>. Clearly enough, the ’devouring’ of the fourth beast is a summation of all previous ’devourings’ of God’s land and people. Even in Old Testament times, this idea of a singular beast embodying all Israel’s enemies was not unknown. For <a href='B:330 34:28'>Eze 34:28</a> looked forward to the day when "Neither shall the beast of the land devour them [any more]". <a href='B:460 3:11'>Mal 3:11</a> likewise speaks of how "the devourer" will be rebuked by God when finally Israel respond to the Elijah prophet (<a href='B:460 3:1'>Mal 3:1</a>). This again suggests that the final devouring of Israel will be whilst the Elijah prophet is making an ongoing appeal for their repentance and acceptance of Jesus. Once they do so, the devourer is rebuked and Jesus returns to His desperately repentant people.</p><p>The beast stamps on others (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>); the same word is used for how Egypt did this to God’s people and others within the land promised to Abraham (<a href='B:330 32:2'>Eze 32:2</a>). Although Egypt doesn’t figure in the sequence of metals in the image of Daniel 2, the beast incorporates aspects of all Israel’s previous dominators- and they include Egypt. We can therefore expect the beast entity to include features of Nazi, Catholic and other historical persecutors of God’s people, even though those entities weren’t part of the Daniel 2 image. This is why the historical interpretations of 666 and the beast which apply them to Nero’s Rome and various Catholic persecutions are not per se incorrect. They were true for their time. But the final persecuting entity will include them all within what it is and what it does.</p><p>The Remnant</p><p>It is specifically stated that the beast "stamped the remnant" after it had torn and destroyed the land. This could refer to the remnant or “rest” of the beasts (7:12 s:w:). But it may mean that as a result of all the persecution and destruction of the majority of Jews in the land, the surviving remnant of God’s people is stamped underfoot, or subjected to despite. The very same metaphor is used of how the city of God will be "trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled". Those "times" may well refer to the period of 1260 days, three and a half years, spoken of in the prophecies of the tribulation. This trodden down and abused remnant are those who willfinally repent and accept Jesus. There are prophecies of how this "remnant" (same word translated "residue" in <a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a> AV) will finally repent (<a href='B:290 10:20-22'>Isa 10:20-22</a>; <a href='B:290 28:5'>Isa 28:5</a>). <a href='B:290 11:11'>Isa 11:11</a>; <a href='B:290 11:16'>Isa 11:16</a> speaks of the latter day gathering of this "remnant" from areas throughout the land promised to Abraham- as if there will be a literal taking captive of the surviving Jews left in the land, scattering them throughout the ’land’ promised to Abraham. The chronology fits well- the beast briefly dominates the land, the majority of Jews living there are killed, a remnant remains, who are stamped underfoot whilst Jerusalem likewise is trodden underfoot, and this leads to their repentance and therefore the return of the Lord Jesus to save them from the jihadists. It’s worth noting that the word "remnant" is used repeatedly of the remnant of Judah who were in captivity in Babylon at Daniel’s time and the remnant of them who returned to the land. This would’ve been how his first audience naturally understood the term- referring to Jewish people who had been taken out of their land by their neighbours (<a href='B:150 3:8'>Ezr 3:8</a>; <a href='B:150 4:3'>Ezr 4:3</a>; <a href='B:150 4:7'>Ezr 4:7</a>; <a href='B:150 4:9'>Ezr 4:9</a>; <a href='B:150 6:16'>Ezr 6:16</a>; <a href='B:160 10:28'>Neh 10:28</a>; <a href='B:160 11:1'>Neh 11:1</a>; <a href='B:160 11:20'>Neh 11:20</a>; <a href='B:190 9:16'>Est 9:16</a> "the remnant of the Jews that were in the king’s provinces"):&nbsp;</p><p>Then shall come to pass the word of <a href='B:450 12:8'>Zec 12:8</a>: "He that is feeble among them [s:w. <a href='B:340 11:41'>Dan 11:41</a> about how many in the land of Israel will be overthrown or made feeble] in that day shall be as David". The suggested allusion is to David overcoming the Palestinian Goliath, who all else feared to make war with as he spoke his blasphemy against God and Israel- exactly the language of <a href='B:730 13:4-8'>Rev 13:4-8</a>.</p><p>The Beasts all Exist Together</p><p>There is a clear parallel between the four winds which strove with each other upon the sea, and the four beasts who came up out of the sea. The impression is that these beasts all exist at the same time, and their conflict with each other leads to the final appearance of a beast which represents all of them; and this entity dominates the earth / land promised to Abraham, and God’s people upon it. The appearance of this entity will therefore be brought about by massive conflict within the land promised to Abraham- and this is what we are seeing before our eyes. The only uniting issue between the powers in that area is a common hatred of Israel and desire to take Jerusalem. This will be the basis of the final beast arising. We can perhaps look to the development of four distinct power groups within the land promised to Abraham, giving rise to ten ‘kings’ or leaders, the horns of the beast, the ten toes of the image. The period of conflict between those groups could be very brief. We need not, therefore, think that the Lord’s coming isn’t near because we can’t currently identify those four entities or ten leaders. What we are seeing before our eyes is the winds blowing on the sea, striving between the peoples of the land / earth promised to Abraham, leaving millions dead and the entire region in bitter division. And this, according to Daniel 7, will give rise to the emergence of the final entity of abuse, probably an Islamic State, likely on the pattern of the entity now known as the Islamic State.</p><p>The beast of Revelation 13 has elements of all the other beasts. And so does the fourth beast of Daniel 7. It had iron teeth and brass nails (<a href='B:340 7:19'>Dan 7:19</a>), alluding to the brass of the third kingdom and the iron of the fourth kingdom. It had “eyes of a man” and a human eye on its horn, (<a href='B:340 7:8'>Dan 7:8</a>; <a href='B:340 7:20'>Dan 7:20</a>), just as the first beast, the lion, had a human heart and stood up like a man (<a href='B:340 7:4'>Dan 7:4</a>). The bear, the second beast, had three ribs in its mouth, representing its conquest of three other powers; the fourth beast features a little horn which conquers three other horns (<a href='B:340 7:8'>Dan 7:8</a>). The bear also ‘devoured much flesh’ (<a href='B:340 7:5'>Dan 7:5</a>); the fourth beast ‘devours’ the land (<a href='B:340 7:7'>Dan 7:7</a>). The third beast, the leopard, had four heads (<a href='B:340 7:6'>Dan 7:6</a>), rather like the fourth beast also has ten horns; and Revelation 13 explains that these are later located on seven heads. The fourth beast of Daniel 7 is therefore a composite beast; the other beasts merge into an entity which includes all of them, even though they still exist separately- for in the final Divine judgment, the fourth beast entity is destroyed, but the beasts have their dominion taken away although their lives are “prolonged for a season and time” (<a href='B:340 7:12'>Dan 7:12</a>). This may mean that the final entity is destroyed, but the individual components of it continue to exist “for a season and time”. The only other reference in Daniel to a period being “prolonged” is when the same word is used in <a href='B:340 4:27'>Dan 4:27</a> regarding the possibility of the king of the kingdom prolonging his life by repentance; it could be that the delay or prolonging is in order they repent:&nbsp; This may also explain why the first beast, representing Babylon, is pictured as having a man’s heart being given to it after its wings [power] are cropped. The historical king of Babylon had a beast’s heart (<a href='B:340 4:16'>Dan 4:16</a>), but his understanding [a human heart] returned to him on his repentance (<a href='B:340 4:34'>Dan 4:34</a>). So this feature of the first beast may be a hit at a repentance after the pattern of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel chapter 4.</p><p>The Revival of all the Beasts</p><p>On one hand, the metals of the image in Daniel 2, and the sequence of beasts which parallel them in Daniel 7, speak of a series of kingdoms in history which dominated Israel. And yet on the other hand, they must all exist in the last days, under the headship of a latter day Babylon. I suggest this will be fulfilled by the latter day entity which dominates Israel including elements of all the previous empires which dominated Israel. The other prophecies in Daniel contain more detail about these various empires in their historical fulfilment. Elements of those prophecies will therefore also have some application in a latter day sense; various characteristics of those empires will be seen in the final entity which dominates Israel. It will be not only Assyria redivivus &nbsp;but also Persia, Greece and Rome redivivus. This kind of thing is seen elsewhere in the Scriptures- for often Israel’s enemies are described in terms of their previous oppressors, especially Egypt. Take <a href='B:290 52:4'>Isa 52:4</a>: “My people went down into Egypt to live there, and the Assyrian oppressed them without cause”. It was the Egyptians who oppressed Israel in Egypt, but they are here called the Assyrian- because at Isaiah’s time, the Assyrians were the threat to Judah, but they are cast by Isaiah in terms of the Egyptians of previous centuries.</p><h4>Daniel 7 depicts the various metals of the image as various beasts. The final beast of the last days incorporates all the elements of the previous beasts. But her head will be Babylon, replete with a latter day Nebuchadnezzar. Note that the first three of the empires of Daniel’s image had Babylon as their capital. It is appropriate that the latter day revival of the image and beast has Babylon likewise as its capital. It surely cannot be accidental that in Babylon today, “the ancient temple of Ishtar has been rebricked, replastered and whitewashed… carved into the bricks are reliefs of oxen and a mythical beast called the mushrishu, with the head of a serpent, body of a fish, front legs of a lion, and back legs of an eagle” (Chattanooga New Free Press, April 5, 1987). Latter day Babylon chooses to identify itself as an amalgam of beasts!</h4><p>The various beasts and metals must all be in existence at the time of Christ’s return in order for him to destroy them by his coming. The little stone hits the image on its ten toes- corresponding to the ten horns of the fourth beast of Daniel 7. The ten horns must in a sense be in existence at the time of Christ’s coming. But so also is the fourth beast, corresponding to the legs of iron- because it is at the coming of Christ that “the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame” (<a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>). Likewise at this same time, “the rest of the beasts… had their dominion taken away” (<a href='B:340 7:12'>Dan 7:12</a>). The other beasts, corresponding to the earlier metals in the image, are ‘alive’ at the coming of Christ. Just as the image stands complete, so all the beasts are alive in order to receive judgment. The horns are presented as part of the fourth beast; their destruction is part and parcel of the fourth beast’s destruction.</p><h4>Daniel sees the four beasts (corresponding with the four metals of the image of Daniel 2) all come up together after the waves of the sea are troubled (<a href='B:340 7:3'>Dan 7:3</a>), connecting with the Lord’s description of the last day powers around Israel in the same way (<a href='B:490 21:25'>Luk 21:25</a>). The fact they all come up together shows that he was not only seeing a continuous historic vision. The way he sees the beast representing Babylon come up when historical Babylon at the time of the vision had already ’come up’ shows it was not a historical description of those powers. The beasts all exist again in the last day, just as all the metals of the image exist together in order to be destroyed together by the Lord’s return. Yet the ’traditional’ interpretation of the beasts as depicting the various empires which dominated Israel in the past still holds true; the point is, the final beast incorporates elements of all those powers which once dominated Israel. It is in this sense that the whole image of Daniel 2 stands complete in the last days; the latter day Nebuchadnezzar has beneath him all the elements of Israel’s previous persecutors.</h4>


text:
<p>Until the ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom- These are the same "saints" who are prevailed against in :21. I have mentioned at several points in expounding Revelation that it could well be that those of God’s people slain during the final tribulation are resurrected separately, and are used to judge their latter day abusers.</p>


text:
<h4>Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be a fourth kingdom on the land- The land in view is that promised to Abraham. This is parallel with the fourth power in the image vision reigning over "all the earth" or land.</h4><h4>Which shall be different from all the kingdoms, and shall devour the whole land, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces- In :19, the fourth beast devours, treads down and breaks in pieces "the remnant", both of Israel and of the earlier beasts, just prior to being destroyed by the Lord’s return to earth. All the beasts are therefore in existence together in the last days. Any attempt to find historical fulfilments of these things is therefore doomed, and at best only vague fulfilments can be suggested. Instead of devouring persons, "the remnant", here the fourth beast devours and abuses "the whole land". This is clearly the land promised to Abraham. No very satisfying fulfilment of this can be found in the various historicist interpretations. It is the "land" which is from where the beasts arise, it is that same land where they have dominion and are devoured by the fourth beast. It is the picture of a total bloodbath in the entire eretz promised to Abraham, and the scene is now set for that to happen. It is the sheer scale of the evil, aggression, torture and bloodletting which makes this final beast "different" from all others in history. The same word is used in Daniel for how the face of Nebuchadnezzar was "changed" because of the extreme wrath he felt towards the Jews (<a href='B:340 3:19'>Dan 3:19</a>). Whilst all the beasts ’differed’ from each other (:3), there was something radically different in how this beast was different to all of them (:7,19). Any attempt to apply this to historical Rome fails to account for this radical difference required by the text.</h4>


text:
<p>As for the ten horns, out of this kingdom shall ten kings arise: and another shall arise after them; and he shall be different from the former, and he shall put down three kings- The language used in Daniel 7 about "the little horn" matches that of <a href='B:340 11:36-45'>Dan 11:36-45</a> about "the king of the north", who was Vespasian in the AD70 context. The shadowy primary fulfilments help us to imagine the kind of latter day fulfilment which is the primary burden of these prophecies. Vespasian directed war against the Jews and Jerusalem in particular for three and a half years, from the battle of Ptolemais in April AD67 to September AD70 when Jerusalem fell (Josephus, The Jewish War 3:29; 6:407; 435). He was made emperor in AD69, a year which saw three emperors in one year: Galba, Otho, and Vitellius. One cannot deny an initial fulfilment here; but Vespasian was in Palestine and Egypt all that time, and it is hard to say that he ’put them down’ in the terms required by the language here. So we have to accept that this was but a primary fulfilment, looking ahead to a greater one when antichrist is established in the last days, presiding over the three and a half year tribulation of Israel and the Jews. Kenneth Gentry points out that if Julius Caesar is counted as the first emperor of Rome,&nbsp; then Vespasian would have been the tenth emperor, the tenth horn who was also the little horn (Kenneth L. Gentry Jr:, Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation (San Francisco: Christian Universities Press, 1997) pp. 154–159). But this horn, different from the others just as the fourth beast differs from the other beasts (:7,19) is something radically different and unprecedented in human history. It points, as noted on :24, to a radically abusive destruction within the eretz promised to Abraham; it will truly be the unprecedented time of Jacob’s trouble (<a href='B:300 30:7'>Jer 30:7</a>; <a href='B:340 12:1'>Dan 12:1</a>). The Nazi holocaust will pale into insignificance before it.</p>


text:
<h4>He shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear down the saints of the Most High; and he shall think to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and half a time- The little horn seeks "to change times and laws"; but we go straight on to read that God’s people are given into his power for "a time and times and the dividing of time" (<a href='B:340 7:25'>Dan 7:25</a> AV). It could therefore be that the time period of time, times and half a time [three and a half years?] is in fact defined and chosen by the little horn, as part of him seeking to establish "times". This could explain why there is some variableness in this period- Daniel 12 mentions 1260,1290 and 1335 days. If Israel repent, or other preconditions are met, then the time of intended abuse is changed. Israel were to be punished "seven times" for their sins (<a href='B:30 26:18'>Lev 26:18</a>; <a href='B:30 26:21'>Lev 26:21</a>; <a href='B:30 26:24'>Lev 26:24</a>; <a href='B:30 26:28'>Lev 26:28</a> etc:). Perhaps those seven times are halved to three and a half times, due to God’s desire to shorten the days of this awful tribulation. It may be that the little horn power or ruler decrees a time of abuse for the remaining Jews. Or it may be that the new caliph seeks to change some tenets of Islam, as he already is doing by shifting the focus of Islam from Mecca (which is in Saudi Arabia, who are officially against the Islamic jihadists currently)- to Jerusalem. Or it may be that they seek to change GMT time to Mecca time- something radical Moslems already live by, and seek to spread to the entire planet. Indeed, the biggest clock in the world has been built in Mecca in a bid to enforce Mecca time on all Moslems rather than GMT. The Mecca Clock Tower has been designed in purposeful contrast to Big Ben.</h4><p>The little horn of Daniel 7 is the beast of Revelation 13 :</p><table><tr><td></p><h4>Daniel 7</td><td>Revelation 3</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>"::. a mouth speaking great things" (verse 8) "And he shall speak great words against the most High ::." (verse 25)</h4><p>"I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them" (verse 21)</td><td>"And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies . . . And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven" (verses 5,6) "And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them" (verse 7)</td><td></td></tr></table><h4>Notice that the little horn of Daniel 7 is actually called "the beast": "I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame" (<a href='B:340 7:11'>Dan 7:11</a>).</h4><p>The little horn is also to be connected with the “King of the north” of Daniel 11, which is historically based upon Antiochus and the leaders of the northern part of the Greek empire, from Syria. The fact the Islamic jihadists and their leadership have emerged from Syria is maybe significant in this context:</p><table><tr><td></p><h4></td><td>Daniel 7</td><td>Daniel 8</td><td>Daniel 11</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>1.</td><td>The little horn</td><td>The little horn</td><td>"The king"</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2.</td><td>At the end</td><td>At the end</td><td>At the end</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>of the times</td><td>of the times</td><td>of the times</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>of the Gentiles</td><td>of the Gentiles</td><td>of the Gentiles</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3.</td><td>Very aggressive</td><td>Very aggressive</td><td>Very aggressive</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4.</td><td>"A look more stout than his fellows"</td><td>Magnifies himself</td><td>Magnifies himself</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5.</td><td>A mouth speaking</td><td></td><td>Speaks marvellous</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>great thingsagainst</td><td></td><td>things against the</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>the Most High</td><td></td><td>God of gods</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>6.</td><td>Makes war against the saints and prevails</td><td>Destroys the holy people</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>7.</td><td>Destroyed by the</td><td>Destroyed by the</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Ancient of days</td><td>Prince of princes</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table><p>We note further that the little horn of Daniel 8 is connected with the beast of Revelation:</h4><table><tr><td></p><h4>". . . it cast down some ::. of the stars to the ground, and stamped upon them"</td><td>"And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven and did cast them to the earth"</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>(<a href='B:340 8:10'>Dan 8:10</a>)</td><td>(<a href='B:730 12:4'>Rev 12:4</a>)</td><td></td></tr></table>


text:
<h4>But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away- The "they" refers to "the saints", who shall judge the world. The saints refer to natural and spiritual Israel as well as the Angels. <a href='B:530 6:2-3'>1Co 6:2-3</a> seems to have this passage in mind: "The saints shall judge the world. And if the world is to be judged by you::. You shall judge Angels". This could therefore mean that the "saints", the Christian believers, shall along with Angels judge as Angels. For that is the idea here in Daniel 7, which was clearly in Paul’s mind. The ’taking away’ of the dominion is the same word as in <a href='B:340 2:21'>Dan 2:21</a> - God "removes kings". The image vision shall come ultimately true at the hands of God’s once oppressed people.</h4><h4>His dominion, to consume and to destroy it to the end- Just as the fourth beast consumed and destroyed, so it shall be consumed and destroyed. This is a major theme of Revelation- the judgments poured out upon the earth / land of Abraham by the latter day abusers are then given to them. Babylon drinks her own cup.</h4>


