- This topic has 649 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 2 weeks ago by
.
- Posts
speculations Rome was decided into the East and West Empire at one time. But the Roman Empire has not existed for over fifteen hundred years now.
Hello brother Gene, I am not disputing about Roman Empire spreading from West to East. I am only arguing that the Danielic Fourth kingdom can be spread from North to South as in the case of Greece which was the Fourth kingdom as per this writer. It is clearly explained in Chap 8 & 11 of Daniel from which the Little horn Antiochus IV ruled from North. The Christian and Jewish interpreters included Rome as Fourth kingdom which is no where visible in this book. You can not take Chap 2 in isolation with other visions of Daniel like four beasts. Please go through Chap 2,7,8, 10 and 11 for understanding those so called four Kingdoms.
Adam……What I have given you is the “overview” of it all, What your doing I believe is getting buried in the details, if those details don’t fit the “overview ” , the you must adjust or try to Aline to it. Start with the overview I have given and then fill in the blanks to fit it. Believe me you really can.
peace and love to you and yours……..gene
Gene AND ALL
We are now living in the Fifth time period of “Iron and Clay”. The next to come, will be the Sixth world ruling Kingdom of Jesus and the Saint’s, and Satan will be bound and cast into the bottomless pit, for one thousand years, then he will be released for a short time,and the the Babylonian system will rise again as the Seventh world ruling Satanic system of rule and out of that will come the Eighth, consisting of ten nations and will completely destroy the Seventh kingdom of Babylon rule forever , then they shall go after the Sixth kingdom of Jesus and the Saint’s to destroy them, but God the Father will bring down from heaven fire on them and destroy them all and the devil will be cast into the lake fire and go into perdition for ever, and God the Father will return to this earth and Jesus will turn his kingdom over to him, and become subject to the Father as we all will forever and ever.
Me
IRON AND CLAY IS ONLY THE SECOND PHASE OF THE FOURTH EMPIRE(IRON). IT IS ALWAYS THE FOURTH BUT DIVIDED(v.41), STRONG AND FRAGILE, SEEKING UNION THROUGH HUMAN ALLIANCES, BUT NOT THE COVENANT IN CHRIST. THEY WILL NEVER BE UNITED(v.43).
WHEN THIS PHASE OF THE FOURTH EMPIRE PASSES, THE KINGDOM OF GOD WILL BE ESTABLISHED, THIS IS AFFIRMED BY DANIEL 2:44
And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall NEVER BE DESTROYED: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
IDEM IN DANIEL 7
[17] These great beasts, which are four, are FOUR KINGS , which shall come out of the earth.
[18] But the saints of the Most High will take the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.
FOUR HUMANS KINGDOMS ,THEN KINGDOM OF GOD WITH THE SAINTS
Note :FOUR KINGS = FOUR KINGDOMS (v. 23) YOU WILL NEVER SEE FIVE HERE IT IS TALK ABOUT WORLD EMPIRE. THE FIRST BEING THAT OF BABYLON. Thou, O king (NEBUCADNEDSAR), art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. [38] And WHERESOEVER THE CHILDREN OF MEN DWELL, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.
Let’s take your example of Roman Empire in two legs one West and the other East. I ask you why not we take legs of the Image of Nebuchadnezzar as North and South Greece Kingdom as clearly uttered in Dan 11?
One reason is Greece being two empires ahead of Babylon, not three.
One reason is Greece being two empires ahead of Babylon, not three.
Sorry??? Please clarify with verses. You never replied my query on Rome as fourth Empire with proof in Daniel whereas I have given you verses for Greece being the fourth Empire of Daniel.
I am quoting the verses again for your ready reference;
The writer of Daniel clearly mentioned four (names) kingdoms in his texts. Please check the following verses;
1. Babylon (Dan 1: 1; 2:37) God had given a kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar
2. Media (Dan 5:31; 9:1; 11:1) A fictitious king Darius named for Median kingdom by this writer.
3. Persia ( Dan 6:28; 10:1; 10:13; 11:2) Daniel was living at the time of Cyrus the Persian king and few details of kings Persia mentioned in these verses.
4. Greece (Dan 8:21; 10:20; 11:2) Dan 11 talks about the fourth kingdom the realm of Greece in details including the little horn, the Antiochus IV.
The four Kingdoms were Babylon, Media, Persia and Greece as per this writer. As per Chap 8 & 11 the Little horn would arise from Greece the fourth kingdom. Followed by the so called fifth kingdom of God’s saints which never took place after this fourth kingdom.
The Medo-Persians, led by King Cyrus II, invaded Babylonia from the east in June of 539 B.C. and captured its capital, Babylon, in July of the same year.
The Medo-Persians, led by King Cyrus II, invaded Babylonia from the east in June of 539 B.C. and captured its capital, Babylon, in July of the same year.
But the book of Daniel differs this. Please read Dan 5:30-31
30 That very night Belshazzar, the Chaldean king, was killed. 31 And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.
This is the Problem with the traditional interprets they don’t want to see what the writer intended us to know. They want to stick to their ideas. The second Kingdom was Media as per this writer and not Medo-Persia.
The Book of Daniel originated from a collection of legends circulating in the Jewish community in Babylon and Mesopotamia in the Persian and early Hellenistic periods (5th to 3rd centuries BC), and was later expanded by the visions of chapters 7–12 in the Maccabean era (mid-2nd century).
The “four kingdoms” theme appears explicitly in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7, and is implicit in the imagery of Daniel 8. Daniel’s concept of four successive world empires is drawn from Greek theories of mythological history. The symbolism of four metals in the statue in chapter 2 is drawn from Persian writings, while the four “beasts from the sea” in chapter 7 reflect Hosea 13:7–8, in which God threatens that he will be to Israel like a lion, a leopard, a bear or a wild beast. The consensus among scholars is that the four beasts of chapter 7, like the metals of chapter 2, symbolise Babylon, Media, Persia and the Seleucid Greeks, with Antiochus IV as the “small horn” that uproots three others (Antiochus usurped the rights of several other claimants to become king)
The traditionalists included to Rome as fourth kingdom by clubbing Media & Persia together as second Kingdom which was not the intention of this writer. Rome is no where found in this book. Christian and Jewish apologists allegedly included Rome, as the so called God’s Kingdom of his saints never took place as predicted by this writer.
Here is another Christian interpretation of Dan 2 image.
The image of Daniel 2
The image has a head of gold, and Daniel interprets it as follows:
‘You, O king, the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, and the might, and the glory, and into whose hand he has given, wherever they dwell, the sons of men, the beasts of the field, and the birds of the air, making you rule over them all—you are the head of gold.’
Thus we are told that the head of gold represents Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. Under Nebuchadnezzar, Babylon rose to a position of great power, wealth and magnificence.
The breast and arms of this image are of silver and Daniel interprets as follows:
‘And after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to you’.
(As per Dan 5:30-31) Daniel is here describing the Median empire. This empire was contemporaneous with the Babylonian empire, but after the death of Nebuchadnezzar in 562 BC it became the stronger of the two, because the power and wealth of Babylon immediately declined. Babylon was still a power, but the scales had tipped in favour of the Medes. Remember that the head of gold symbolizes Nebuchadnezzar, and Daniel says, ‘And after you (Nebuchadnezzar) shall arise another kingdom inferior to you.’ Following the death of Nebuchadnezzar, Media was the major power for at least twelve years until it was united with Persia in 550 BC under the rule of Cyrus. The Median empire did not, however, have the glory and magnificence of Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon—it was of inferior quality.
It is often objected that the Median empire did not really follow after the Babylonian empire—it was contemporaneous with it. It may be replied, however, that the order of Daniel’s kingdoms is the order of their rise to the height of power and prominence. Daniel does not say that each kingdom exists only from the time of destruction of the preceding kingdom to the time of its own destruction. The order of the kingdoms is notmerely the order of their existence—it is the order of their occupation of the seat of supreme power: in other words, the order in which they held the title of ‘top nation’! This is confirmed in the vision of the four beasts, because we learn there that after the fourth kingdom has been destroyed, the first three kingdoms continue to exist for a while together, although their dominion is taken away from them. This clearly indicates that they are to some extent contemporaneous.
The assertion that there was no Median empire between the Babylonian and Persian empires seems to be based on a misconception. This misconception is the idea that Persia succeeded Babylon as dominant world power when it overthrew Babylon in 539 BC. Persia in fact became the dominant world power some years before Babylon fell. Cyrus built up a very large and powerful empire which outstripped the Babylonian empire several years before he got round to conquering the latter empire. If it be admitted, and so it must, that Persia became dominant world power before the actual fall of Babylon, it can also be admitted that Media may have been the dominant world power before Persia.
Babylon and Media were the two great rivals for world power, and after the death of Nebuchadnezzar, it seemed inevitable that Media would overthrow Babylon. This was the state of affairs for a few uneasy years. But suddenly, events took an unexpected turn. Media’s king was overthrown by one of his own vassals, the brilliant Persian king, Cyrus. Cyrus united the Medes and Persians as allies under his own rule; but from this time Persia was on the ascendant. For some years the two peoples held the reins of power together; but the Persians had the edge on the Medes and increased their power until they were completely dominant.
Daniel continues the interpretation as follows:
‘… and yet a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth’.
The third kingdom is symbolized by the image’s belly and thighs of bronze and is to ‘rule over all the earth’. The characteristic of this third kingdom is the immense area over which it rules. This is the perfect description of the Persian empire, because the most striking aspect of that empire was the huge area it covered—it was by far the vastest empire the world had seen. The following Greek empire was in fact slightly smaller than the Persian empire. In all regions except Greece and across the Indus river, Alexander’s Greek empire either fell short of or failed to extend beyond the limits of the Persian empire.
Cyrus himself created the largest empire the world had seen up to that time; but his successors continued to push the frontiers outwards until the Persian empire was truly breathtaking in size. In a series of brilliant campaigns Cyrus annexed the entire Median empire, the large and powerful kingdom of Lydia in Asia Minor, much territory in the East—and then the Babylonian empire. His successors added all Egypt, a chunk of Europe and more territory in the East.
Note also the way in which Daniel groups together the second and third kingdoms. The second kingdom is passed over quickly with a brief and belittling remark, possibly indicating that its term of supreme power is comparatively insignificant and short-lived, as well as being inferior in wealth and magnificence. It is grouped with, and closely followed and overshadowed by, the world-ruling third kingdom. The whole description is strongly suggestive of the Medo-Persian situation, because the comparatively insignificant Median empire was absorbed and eclipsed by the subsequently enormous Persian empire only a very short time after it (Media) had itself surpassed Babylon. The description of the second and third kingdoms fits the Median and Persian empires far better than it fits the huge, wealthy, long-lived Persian empire and the rather smaller Greek empire.
Greece is the fourth metal
Daniel 6:28
So Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian.Daniel 5:27-28
TEKEL means that you have been weighed on the scales and found deficient. PERES means that your kingdom has been divided and given over to the Medes and Persians.The Book of Daniel describes the Medes and the Persians as one kingdom. But like all kingdoms, there are multiple kings. Some might have been Persian, others Mede. But still the same kingdom. The same goes for Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar was definitely not the only king of Babylon. He was the king when the prophecy was given.
In the history of the Roman Empire we also see kings being assassinated and replaced etc. It doesn’t become a new kingdom just because a new king takes over because of the death or replacement of the previous king. This is a bit like the feet of iron mixed with clay. In other words, the Roman Empire was taken over by another people. The capital of the empire was taken over.
The Book of Daniel states that the kingdom was given to the Medes and the Persians, thus according to that book, these two were one empire. So that leaves Rome as the two legs. Simple. It may well be that together they were strong enough to conquer. But like all partnerships, it could be problematic later on with conflicts between the two.
We are debating the Book of Daniel and you are asking me to use that book. Done!
Why the Medes and Persians are considered one kingdom in the Book of Daniel
“This was the dream, and now we will interpret it to the king. 37 Your Majesty, you are the king of kings. The God of heaven has given you dominion and power and might and glory; 38 in your hands he has placed all mankind and the beasts of the field and the birds in the sky. Wherever they live, he has made you ruler over them all. You are that head of gold. “After you, another kingdom will arise, inferior to yours.
TEKEL means that you have been weighed on the scales and found deficient. PERES means that your kingdom has been divided and given over to the Medes and Persians.
= Medes and Persians are one kingdom
Anything else you would like to discuss?
Christian interpretations are a dime a dozen just as scientific interpretations are. It’s a natural consequence of investigating something that needs interpreting. No big deal. Some theories are better than others.
Continued from Daniel 2 to 7 and further…
The four beasts of Daniel 7
Daniel recounts, ‘The first was like a lion and had eagles’ wings. Then as I looked its wings were plucked off, and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand upon two feet like a man; and the mind of a man was given to it.’
The winged lion is familiar in Babylonian art. The eagle was a symbol of swiftness and the lion one of strength and nobility (2 Sa. 1:23). The eagle was the king of birds, and the lion the king of beasts. They correspond to the image’s head of gold, the metal which was regarded as the noblest and most valuable of all metals. Almost all are agreed that this beast represents Babylon and that the change which comes upon it probably symbolizes Nebuchadnezzar’s madness and subsequent restoration (Dn. 4). Note that again Babylon in the time of Nebuchadnezzar is strongly indicated. The Bible repeatedly describes Nebuchadnezzar and the Chaldeans of his time as being like both an eagle (Dt. 28:49–53, cf. 2 Kings 25:1–11; Je. 49:19, 22; La. 4:19; Ezk. 17:1–5, 11–14; Hab. 1:6–8) and a lion (Is. 5:25–30; Je. 4:6, 7, 13, cf. 25:9, 38; 49:19, 22; 50:17, 44). These creatures were used to convey a picture of Nebuchadnezzar coming from afar against the Jews and their neighbours and carrying them off as captives to Babylon. The book of Daniel always associates the glory and magnificence of Babylon with Nebuchadnezzar (Dn. 2:37, 38; 4:22, 30, 36; 5:18, 19).
It is a historical fact that Nebuchadnezzar was largely responsible for the glory of the Neo-Babylonian empire. He came to the throne when his father died in 605 BC, soon after the final obliteration of Assyria—an event which Nebuchadnezzar helped to bring about. During his long reign of 43 years, Babylon was practically invincible. Moreover, he lavished immense wealth and architectural skill on his capital city, making it world-famous for its magnificence and strength. Nebuchadnezzar was both a great soldier and a great builder. After his death, however, a series of relatively weak kings followed each other in rapid succession and Babylon’s power declined. She was still a power, but whereas she formerly had the edge on her great rival, Media, the position was now reversed.
Daniel continues, ‘And behold, another beast, a second one, like a bear. It was raised up on one side; it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth; and it was told, “Arise, devour much flesh.” ’ Although the bear is not so swift as the lion, it was equally feared, owing to its great strength and the unpredictability of its actions. The lion and the bear are mentioned together a number of times in Scripture (1 Sam. 17:34; Prov. 28:15; La. 3:10; Am. 5:19), and both were clearly objects of special fear and respect. In a similar way the rival powers of Babylon and Media together commanded the nations’ fear and respect. The bear is a comparatively slow-moving and clumsy creature; therefore this symbol applies better to the Median empire than to the Persian. The career of Cyrus the Persian was characterized by a succession of swift and brilliant victories, better symbolized by the next beast, which is a leopard.
We are told that the bear ‘was raised up on one side’, and I suggest the following explanation. Media’s period of power was divided into two very different stages. During the first stage she was the powerful head of a large empire—this is represented by the side of the bear which is raised up. During the second stage she was the somewhat inferior partner of Persia—Daniel is careful to emphasize (chapters 5, 6 and 8) that the Medes and Persians ruled together as allies for a number of years following Cyrus’s victory over the Median king in 550 BC. This part of Media’s reign is represented by the lower side of the bear. During her partnership with Persia, she was still ruling the nations, but in a humbler capacity than before. Her partnership with Persia constituted the world’s most powerful empire; but despite the exalted nature of her continued ruling of the nations, it was not as exalted as it had been before the rise of Persia.
We are told that three ribs were in the bear’s mouth between its teeth, and that it was commanded, ‘Arise, devour much flesh.’ It is generally agreed that the three ribs must represent three nations conquered by the bear, and that the bear is ordered to arise and make fresh conquests. The identities of the three nations, however, have remained in doubt. The Bible itself, as is so often the case, provides the answer. We find it in Jeremiah 51:27–29. In this passage God stirs up four nations against Babylon. This reminds us that the bear with the three ribs was also stirred up—and probably against Babylon. Three of these nations were the small kingdoms of Ararat, Minni and Ashkenaz. They all lay to the north of Babylon and all were within the Median empire. The fourth nation was the Median empire itself. The bear with the three ribs between its teeth is a perfect picture of the Median empire and the three small subject kingdoms of Ararat, Minni and Ashkenaz. Note that Media is the principal nation stirred up against Babylon. In the eleventh verse of the same chapter we read, ‘The Lord has stirred up the spirit of the kings of the Medes, because his purpose concerning Babylon is to destroy it.’ In Isaiah 13:17 we read, ‘Behold, I am stirring up the Medes against them (the Babylonians).’ We can see therefore that the prophets repeatedly proclaimed that God would stir up the Medes against Babylon. This is the meaning of the command to arise and devour much flesh. In Isaiah 21:2 Elam and Media are ordered to besiege Babylon, and in verse 9 the fall of Babylon is proclaimed. By the time Media got round to actually besieging Babylon, it had become the inferior partner of Persian-occupied Elam, Cyrus’s country of origin. (Elam is not mentioned in Je. 51:27, because although it was a vassal of Media, it formed an alliance with Babylon during the period of Media’s primacy.)
Thus the general picture we have is that Media became stronger than Babylon on the death of Nebuchadnezzar and planned to overcome her, being stirred up to this by God. But before Media was able to carry her plans into effect, she was joined and surpassed by Persia.
Daniel continues, ‘After this I looked, and lo, another, like a leopard, with four wings of a bird on its back; and the beast had four heads; and dominion was given to it.’ The swift and agile winged leopard contrasts vividly with the slow-moving, clumsy bear. Such was the contrast between the ponderous Median empire and the brilliant, swiftly-moving armies of Cyrus the Persian. The early kings that followed Cyrus were not as brilliant as he, but they certainly moved much faster and more purposefully than the Medes.
Now the main characteristic of this third kingdom is, like that of the ‘bronze’ kingdom, one of widespread authority or ‘dominion’, which was the chief characteristic of Persia. This is shown by the four wings symbolizing the four winds, one for each of the ‘four corners of the earth’ (Ps. 104:3; Zc. 2:6). On a clay cylinder, Cyrus described himself as ‘king of the four corners of the earth’. On another he said, ‘Sin, the light of heaven … gave into my hands the four corners of the earth.’
The beast had four heads. Now a head naturally suggests a king or some similar authority. In the eleventh chapter of Daniel we are specially told about four kings of Persia. The first is Cyrus and the fourth is Xerxes. This interpretation of the meaning of the four heads is eminently suitable, because Persia’s main period of expansion and aggression only covered the reigns of these first four kings—Cyrus, Cambyses, Darius and Xerxes (Pseudo-Smerdis being merely a short-lived impostor). Between them these first four kings created the Persian empire in all its vast extent and wealth; and it was after the reign of Xerxes that the decline of the empire began. Xerxes’ small gains in Greece were lost within a few months; but the empire reached the pinnacle of its power, wealth and size during his reign. Each of these four kings had a part to play in the creation of this enormous empire. It was not the work of one man, and the four-headed beast is a perfect picture of this.
Note that the four heads have nothing to do with the four horns of Greece (8:8). The four heads appear to be a feature of the beast’s great dominion, whereas the four horns of Greece are connected with a loss of dominion (cf. 11:4). In 11:2–4 the number four is mentioned twice—once in connection with Persia, and once with Greece. The reference to Persia speaks of an initial phase of riches and power, whereas the reference to Greece speaks of a second phase of division and loss of territory and power. If the third kingdom is the Persian empire, it also follows that the unequal horns of the Persian ram (8:3–4, 20) do not signify the same thing as the unequal sides of the bear (7:5). There is a connection, however, since in both cases the inequality has something to do with the partnership between the Medes and Persians.
We can see therefore that whatever resemblance the third beast might have to any other empire, it was fulfilled in every respect by the Persian empire. Let it again be pointed out that the only thing said about the beast’s rule was the fact that it was to have dominion—which corresponds to the statement that the bronze kingdom was to ‘rule over all the earth’. This was by far the most striking aspect of the Persian empire. It was several times the size of any previous empire. The Greek empire, on the other hand, was no larger than the Persian, and was probably in fact slightly smaller. Moreover, the Persians maintained their vast empire for over two hundred years, whereas the Greek empire was broken up and reduced in size only nine years after its foundation. Note, however, that both the third kingdom and the fourth kingdom are said to rule over or tread down ‘the whole earth’ (2:39; 7:23), and we are given the impression that the fourth kingdom crushes the first three kingdoms (2:40; 7:7, 23). We have already noted that Rome was defeated by the Parthians, and that Babylonia, Media and Persia all remained outside the Roman empire. Greece, on the other hand, rapidly crushed and took over the entire Persian empire (apart from some border areas), including Babylonia, Media and Persia. Thus the third and fourth kingdoms both rule over ‘the whole earth’, and regarding this, we note that Greece ruled over almost the same vast area (both in size and location) as Persia. Note also that the third kingdom rules over the whole earth, but the fourth kingdom devours it, and tramples it down and breaks it to pieces. The Persians ruled over their great empire for over two hundred years. Alexander smashed it rapidly and thoroughly, but he died soon afterwards, before he was able to organize it into as closely cohesive a system as that of the Persians. His successors were unable to maintain it, and it split up into a number of separate kingdoms and was reduced in size. This is all vividly portrayed in Daniel’s fourth kingdom, but I am not dealing with that kingdom here in any detail.
I shall, however, summarize very briefly the ways in which Greece fulfilled the visions of the fourth kingdom and Rome did not—leaving out of consideration the idea that the Roman empire (in its ‘feet of iron and clay’ stage) is still in existence or is to be revived at the end of the present age. (1) The Greek armies of Alexander were invincible, whereas the Roman armies were not (2:40; 7:7, 19). (2) The Greek empire was divided in a very clear-cut way into an initial period of invincible strength and a second period of division and weakness, whereas Rome was not (2:41, 42). (3) Daniel 2:43 was fulfilled very exactly by the Greek attempt to fuse East and West through intermingling and inter-marriage, whereas Rome provided no such fulfilment. (4) The western nation of Greece was very ‘different’ from the oriental nations of Babylon, Media and Persia, whereas Rome was in many respects very similar to Greece (7:23). (5) In the context of the book of Daniel, Greece can be said to have ‘devoured the whole earth’ and to have crushed the first three kingdoms, whereas this cannot be said of Rome (2:40; 7:23). (6) The horns of the fourth beast found a very precise fulfilment in the kings of the Syrian part of the Greek empire from Seleucus Nicator to Antiochus Epiphanes (nearly all of whom are described in chapter 11), whereas Rome provided no such fulfilment…..(taken from the article by Robert J M Gurney)
Any interpretation that makes Media and Persia two kingdoms does not agree with the Book of Daniel.
Rome was a significant kingdom. Far greater than you give it credit for it seems. It had two legs and lasted 1000 years more than most think too. While the East was taken over by the Ottomans, the West divided into roughly 10 nations.
Media and Persia were clearly classed as a single kingdom in the Book Daniel placing Rome as the fourth.
The description for the fourth really fits Rome.
Further, can I ask you to give me your no1 point as to why Greece is the fourth metal?
Let’s debate point by point if you can.
Please show me at least one reference to Rome in whole of Daniel as a world kingdom as you repeatedly stick to your traditional view. I have shown you plenty to prove Greece as the fourth kingdom. The writer of Daniel never dreamed of Rome or future kingdoms like Ottoman….
The Book of Daniel states that the kingdom was given to the Medes and the Persians, thus according to that book, these two were one empire.
Hi Proclaimer
I agree with that. The MEDO PERSIAN bear IS ONE KINGDOM
And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.
“The bear was higher on one side than the other. This was Medo-Persia, a combination of two powers, with Persia being the stronger. This was shown by it being ‘raised up on one side’.
The character of this power is well represented by a bear. The Medes and Persians were cruel and greedy, robbers and spoilers of the people.
It had three ribs in its mouth, indicating the three areas that Medo-Persia conquered to come to rule the world; Babylon, Lydia and Egypt, which were especially ground down and oppressed by this power. It was a cruel and vicious nation and killed many people. That’s why the verse says “Arise and devour much flesh”.
The Medo-Persian kingdom was visited by the wrath of God because in it His Law was trampled underfoot. The fear of God possessed no power among the people. Wickedness, blasphemy, and corruption were the prevailing influences in this kingdom; and the kingdoms that followed were even more base and corrupt. They deteriorated because they cast off God. Forgetting him, they sank lower and lower in the scale of moral worth, while they raised themselves higher and higher in pride and arrogance.”
https://understanding-daniel-revelation.com/Dan/D-7.html
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
