Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

This is the place to discuss anything to do with scriptural doctrine. It is the primary purpose of this site, and most discussions will be here.
Forum rules
Matt 18:6; Eccl 7:9; 1 Pet 4:8 (If you're not sure what they say then please hover over them with your mouse or look them up in your own Bible before posting)
Message
Author
Bobcat
Posts: 3454
Joined: 7 years ago

Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#1 Post by Bobcat » 2 years ago

Purpose of This Thread

My purpose for this thread is to assemble information regarding, what is sometimes referred to as, 'the traditional view' of Daniel chapters 2 and 7. Daniel 2 has the vision of the multi-metaled human image. And Daniel 7 has the vision of four beasts rising out of the sea.

What is the "traditional view"? Basically it holds that the metallic image of Daniel 2 is portraying the same kingdoms as the four beasts of Daniel 7. Gold/1st beast=Babylon, Silver/2nd beast=Medo-Persia, Copper/3rd beast=Greece, Iron/4th beast=Rome.

Various explanations and commentary on these two chapters differ on the details, such as with the toes and horns, etc. But the so-called 'traditional view' generally holds to this basic comparative structure between the metals and beasts of those two chapters of Daniel (as above).

So before going on, and having laid out the purpose of this thread, I want to say that there is no intention on my part to restrict anyone from expressing their views - for or against, or even novel - on this topic. But also keep in mind that part of my intention is to make this thread a sort of depot for information in connection with some other threads (Final King of the North, The AntiChrist, Gentile Times, and possibly others). By having its own thread I was also hoping to keep the information compartmentalized for future ease of reference. Having bits and pieces of information scattered among threads that may be topically unrelated means that useful information may get 'lost.' So if you have a view different from the "traditional" one, fine. But don't be surprised if I don't debate you on it. My purpose for this thread is mainly to assemble information for use elsewhere.


What Has Already Been Posted

Here are some related posts on other threads that formed part of the reason for creating this thread:

StoneCrier's post on Qodam ("in the presence of"/"prior to") in Dan 7:7. And his further explanation in post # 33 (of that thread).

How I saw Qodam and its place in Dan 7:7 (post # 37 of that thread).

AmosAu2's post regarding Rashi's Tanach commentary on Dan 7:7-8.

Some links provided for Dajo1 in connection with the fourth beast being different from all the others. There will be further discussion/reference material on this in other posts.


Links in This Thread to Related Posts

The following posts are meant to expand on the purpose of this thread. This section serves as a sort of quick index:

This post (# 2) shows the chiastic structure that overlays the Aramaic portion of Daniel (chapters 2 thru 7). There is some discussion of the possible relationship of the chapters that complement each other in that chiastic structure (2=7; 3=6; 4=5)

This post (# 14) assembles information showing why the 1st beast (Dan 7:4) has long been considered to be Babylon by most Jewish and Christian commentators.


Bobcat

My Daniel Links

Bobcat
Posts: 3454
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: Chiastic Structure

#2 Post by Bobcat » 2 years ago

Comparative Information for Daniel 2 & 7

Daniel 2 has its setting time as "the second year" of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. (Dan 2:1) Assuming Daniel was referring to when Nebuchadnezzar began his kingship, Constable's Notes offers this:
According to several reliable scholars Nebuchadnezzar officially became king on September 7, 605 B.C. On the first of Nisan, 604 B.C., the following spring, the first official year of his reign began. The intervening months constituted his accession year and were credited to his father’s reign. The first year of his reign then ended on the first of Nisan the following year, 603 B.C. The second year of his reign (Dan 2:1) began in 603 and ended in 602 B.C. [Bolding mine.]
(Note that the WT takes Dan 2:1 as the 2nd year after Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and became "world ruler" in 607 BC [per WT dating]. (dp p. 46 par. 2) This would actually mean Nebuchadnezzar's 20th or 21st year of rule. I mention this as a side note. Obviously, this is contrived so as to support the WT's 607-1914 dating scheme. For example, 2Ki 24:12-17 & 2Ch 36:9-11 show that Nebuchadnezzar was already dominating over Judah more than a decade before Jerusalem's destruction. See also here for COJ's Gentile Times Reconsidered, starting at p. 336ff, which outlines other obvious flaws in this interpretation.)

Daniel 7 is dated at "the first year of king Belshazzar," or c. 553 BCE. (Dan 7:1; Paradoxically, the WT agrees with this dating, but not the dating for Nebuchadnezzar. Go figure!) Thus, approximately 50 years separate Daniel 2 & 7.

Another difference between the two chapters is that Nebuchadnezzar received the vision in chapter 2, which was then interpreted by Daniel with Divine help. Daniel received the vision in chapter 7, which was then interpreted by an angel (no doubt, also with Divine help). At this point only 14 years remained for Babylon's dominance as an empire. Daniel was perhaps a mid-late teen at chapter 2. This would make Daniel to be in his mid-late 60s for chapter 7.


Factors Linking Daniel 2 & 7 Together

One thing linking Daniel chapters 2 & 7 together is language. Dan 2:4 through the end of Daniel 7 is written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the "lingua franca during this period; its origins and usage were not restricted to the Babylonians." (NET footnote 11 for Dan 2:4.) The rest of Daniel is written in Hebrew. Of course, that, in itself, would not prove that the metals and beasts of Dan 2 & 7 are referring to the same empires.

But why did Daniel write these chapters in the official Babylonian language? Some think it may have been due to the more gentile topical nature of those chapters. Nebuchadnezzar figures prominently in chapters 2 thru 4. Belshazzar in 5. Darius (Cyrus) in 6. And gentile empires in 7. The NET footnote 11 (linked to above) opines, "Various views have been advanced to account for this change of language, most of which are unconvincing. Most likely the change in language is a reflection of stages in the transmission history of the book of Daniel."

If relatively few Bible students are aware of the language change in Daniel 2 thru 7, even fewer (maybe not even Daniel himself) are aware of the fact that chapters 2 thru 7 of Daniel form a chiastic or symmetrical literary structure. The structure, wherein the parts opposite of each other are related to, or complementary of, each other, forms a complete story line from a collection of chapters that might otherwise seem unrelated on their own:

A. Chap. 2: Metallic image of gentile kingdoms leading to God's rule.

. . . B. Chap. 3: Persecution of Hebrews by Nebuchadnezzar fails to break their integrity.

. . . . . . C. Chap. 4: Nebuchadnezzar imagines self a great ruler, made insane for 7 times until all know only God rules.

. . . . . . C' Chap. 5: Belshazzar judged as a ruling failure, his kingdom taken away.

. . . B' Chap. 6: Daniel allowed to be persecuted by an unwilling Darius, raised afterwards & enemies slain.

A' Chap. 7: Beasts from sea, leads to "Son of Man" and "holy ones" ruling.

The chiasm, as a whole, tells a story with chapters 4 & 5 forming the central or pivot point. Each of the matching sections is complimentary to its parallel part, and supportive of the pivot point.

Thus, chapter 4 has Nebuchadnezzar made insane for 7 times and forced to compete with animals due to his imagining himself to be a great ruler. He is made to learn that only God is capable of ruling mankind. Belshazzar, on the complementary side in chapter 5, is judged for having failed at being a ruler, and his kingdom is taken from him that night. In the pictured reality, it is Satan who imagines he can rule humans. So for 7 times he competes with humans for rulership. In the end Satan is judged a failure and his kingdom is taken from him. See also this thread which concentrates on Daniel 4.

Chapter 3 has Nebuchadnezzar trying to, at first, force the Hebrews to capitulate in their worship, and then do away with them. In the end he fails in his objective and the God of the Hebrews ends up being praised. In its compliment (chapter 6), Darius is intending to raise Daniel to a supreme ruling position (Dan 6:3), but his enemies plot to have him destroyed. In the end Daniel is rescued and given his ruling authority, but the rulers who plotted against him, and their families, are destroyed altogether. In the pictured reality, the "Son of Man" and "the holy ones" are intended by Jehovah (Darius) to be made rulers. But Satan uses his rulers to persecute them against God's will. (The scene in Daniel where the colluders pressure Darius about Daniel reminds me of Satan in heaven arguing with Jehovah in Job 1 & 2.) In the end, the "Son of Man" is crowned and "the holy ones" are given their rulership. But the rulers of this world, and their followers, are destroyed en masse.

Chapter 2 shows the flow of kingdoms from Babylon on. The shift in the metals shows a deterioration until a division in the kingdom appears. The fact of the division is evidence of a fatal flaw in the rulership. (Mt 12:25) At that point, rulership is taken over by God's kingdom. In chapter 7, the beasts matching the metals run their course. The final rulership (that starts as a small horn) has "eyes like a man." This is the cause of the division in the kingdom in chapter two. It is Satan who is granted authority to rule humans (lesser creatures than himself), for 7 times (the run of 7 empires). He imagines he can give rulership to whomever he wishes. (Lu 4:5-6) But in the end, men choose democratic style rulerships over Satan's autocratic style of kingdoms. Thus, the chiastic structure makes it clear that chapter 7 compliments chapter 2. (See also the Gentile Times . . . Reconsidered thread linked to in the OP.)

Note how God figures in regarding the putting in place of the 8th king for its short-lived rulership. (Rev 17:17) This must be near the time when the 7th trumpet blows and "the kingdom of the world becomes the kingdom of our Lord and His Christ." (Rev 11:15) The grand feast of Dan 5 might possibly equate with the loss of rulership of the 7th world power (Dan 7:25, 26). Satan feels like he has overcome the 7th king, which ruled, but not of Satan's choice. (Rev 13:11b) But it is too late. His ruling experiment has ended in failure, and he must go. (There are numerous other points that can be derived from this chiasm, but I will leave them for later sifting. For example, this chiastic structure makes the WT's interpretation of Dan 4 utterly bogus.)

On the next post I will try to have further points that link Daniel 2 & 7. For a more detailed look at the chiastic structures found in the book of Daniel, see this post.


Bobcat

My Daniel Links

AmosAu2
Posts: 440
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#3 Post by AmosAu2 » 2 years ago

Hi Bobcat,

This thread is a very good idea.

I'd like to bring something to the fore that may not have been discussed before. I think it's quite relevant to any discussion of Daniel.
Some years ago, I discovered that the chapters of Daniel are NOT in chronological order. Since then I've found that others have come across the same understanding.

I thought it may be beneficial to check this out.

Regards, Amos.

Bobcat
Posts: 3454
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#4 Post by Bobcat » 2 years ago

You're right Amos. For example, chapter 7 is previous to 5 chronologically. You might like this page.


Bobcat

My Daniel Links

AmosAu2
Posts: 440
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#5 Post by AmosAu2 » 2 years ago

Hi Bobcat,

Thanks for sharing that information on Daniel. Several years ago I did a quick re-shuffle of the chapters, but need to double check them as I don't think I got them exactly right.

Regards, Amos.

User avatar
coccus ilicis
Posts: 705
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#6 Post by coccus ilicis » 2 years ago

Bobcat wrote:
2 years ago
Purpose of This Thread

My purpose for this thread is to assemble information regarding, what is sometimes referred to as, the traditional view of Daniel chapters 2 and 7. Daniel two has the vision of the multi-metaled human image. And Daniel 7 has the vision of four beasts rising out of the sea.

Bobcat
Hello Bobcat,

I don't know if this is mentioned in any of the commentaries you like to research, but Daniel had this vision in the first year of Belshazzar (Dan 5:1; 7:1), the last king of Babylon. In the explanation given to Daniel, it says: ...As for these four huge beasts, because there are four, there are four kings that shall stand up from the earth... Dan 7:17 - will/shall rise/stand up is future. That would mean the first beast represents Medo-Persia, not Babylon which is represented by the head of Gold at Dan 2:37,38.

Love
LRW~

Bobcat
Posts: 3454
Joined: 7 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#7 Post by Bobcat » 2 years ago

Hi CI,

Do you think it might be possible that the angel is simply speaking from Daniel's perspective? Daniel has a vision in which four beasts appear successively out of the sea. So, when asked, the angel says, "The four great beasts are four kings that will rise from the earth." (NIV; other renderings here).

Keep in mind that no where in Daniel 7 is Daniel said to have understood what kingdoms are being portrayed. (Dan 7:28) He sees the vision of the beasts arising out of the sea, the court scene, and then the angel gives an explanation of the beasts without giving their specific identification, so that "will arise," or "shall arise" takes on a somewhat generic sense, speaking of the whole, which was mostly still future, from Daniel's standpoint.

Regarding, "shall arise" (or "will arise") in Dan 7:17, the Keil & Delitzsch commentary does have some very extensive notes on the chapter, including the fact that a few have made the same argument as you have regarding the words, "shall arise":
From the future יקוּמוּן (shall arise) Hitzig concludes that the first kingdom was yet future, and therefore, that since Daniel had the vision under Belshazzar, the first king could only be Belshazzar, but could not represent the Chaldean monarchy. But if from the words shall arise it follows that the vision is only of kings who arise in the future, then, since Daniel saw the vision in the first year of Belshazzar, it cannot of course be Belshazzar who is represented by the first beast; and if Belshazzar was, as Hitzig thinks, the last king of Chaldea, than the entire Chaldean monarchy is excluded from the number of the four great beasts. Kranichfeld therefore understands this word as modal, and interprets it should arise. This was the divine decree by which also the duration of their kingdoms was determined (Daniel 7:12, Daniel 7:25). But the modal interpretation does not agree with Daniel 7:16, according to which the angel wishes to make known the meaning of the matter to Daniel, not to show what was determined in the divine counsel, but what God had revealed to him by the beasts rising up out of the sea. The future, shall arise, is rather (Ros., v. Leng., Maur., Klief., etc.) for the purpose of declaring that the vision represents the development of the world-power as a whole, as it would unfold itself in four successive phases; whereupon the angel so summarily interprets the vision to the prophet, that, dating from the time of their origin, he points out the first world-kingdom as arising along with the rest, notwithstanding that it had already come into existence, and only its last stages were then future. The thought of this summary interpretation is manifestly nothing else than this: "Four kingdoms shall arise on the earth, and shall again disappear; but the saints of God shall receive the kingdom which shall have an everlasting duration."
The K&D commentary also notes that the view that the four metals and four beasts referred to the same kingdoms was almost universal until recent centuries when critics started to question Daniel as the author of the book with his name.


Bobcat

My Daniel Links

User avatar
coccus ilicis
Posts: 705
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#8 Post by coccus ilicis » 2 years ago

Bobcat wrote:
2 years ago
Hi CI,

Do you think it might be possible that the angel is simply speaking from Daniel's perspective? Daniel has a vision in which four beasts appear successively out of the sea. So, when asked, the angel says, "The four great beasts are four kings that will rise from the earth." (NIV; other renderings here).

Bobcat
Hi Bobcat,

Yes, I do think the given explanation was definitely from Daniel's perspective. But what was his perspective?

In the 2nd year of Nebuchadnezzar Daniel interpreted the meaning of Nebuchadnezzar's dream of a statue made of various metals. Sometime later Nebuchadnezzar asked Daniel to interpret his dream of a tree that reached the heavens and was visible to the extremity of the earth, from which all flesh would feed itself (Dan 4:11,12). It pictured World Rule.

Some 47 years later Daniel has a vision of his own. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_k ... _Babylonia .

He already knew that Babylonian world-rule would come to an end (Dan 2:37-39; 4:17) and was therefore keen to know when and how this would occur. And then when he had his own vision four beasts (Dan 7:2-7,17) that would follow Babylonian rule, he made sure he included the year when he had the vision so that people could accurately identify the beast when the time came (Dan 7:1). His next vision was 2 years later (Dan 8:1). Then just prior to the end of Belshazzar's reign some 14 years later (Dan 5:28) he is called upon to interpret the handwriting on the wall. Knowing that these visions (Dan 7&8) would not be understood until the final part of the days (Dan 8:19,26; 12:4), would we, like Daniel, not make sure that future generations would know when the beasts first appear … As for these huge beasts there are four kings that will stand up from the earth... Dan 7:17.

The last beast is the one that Daniel questioned and is the one that concerns us. This one is different from the rest – its ten horns representing all the kings of the earth (Dan 7:7, 20, 24). And even as Nebuchadnezzar's dream tree, this beast represents global dominion (comp. Dan 4:10-12, 20-22 Dan 7:7,8,23). The global-rule tree stump was banded with copper and iron - Graeco-Roman mentality ...an ancient culture that developed from a blending of Greek, Hellenistic, and Roman cultures... The 4th beast has broken free from the restricting bands of copper and iron, with the copper becoming its claws and the iron its teeth(Dan 7:7,19). The Platonic steady- state philosophy espoused by the Romans was broken.
The Protestant Reformation was a major 16th century European movement aimed initially at reforming the beliefs and practices of the Roman Catholic Church. Its religious aspects were supplemented by ambitious political rulers who wanted to extend their power and control at the expense of the Church.

The Reformation went viral affecting all areas of human activity and thought and mankind went from horse and cart to supersonic flight, intercontinental ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction in little more than a century.

The little horn that sprouted at that time uprooted 3 three horns that stood in its path (Dan 7:8), it is pictured as an 8th king at Rev 17:11. The last king of Babylon who says in his heart ...'To the heavens, I will go up. Above the stars of God I shall lift up my throne and I shall sit down upon the mountain of meeting in the remotest part of the north. I shall go up above the high places of the clouds; I shall make myself resemble the Most High... (Isa 14:13,14,21)

So, yes, the explanation of Daniel chapter seven is from Daniel's perspective, including all he knew and understood at that time. He knew Nebuchadnezzar's world rule would come to an end and that the stump would not sprout again until just prior to the heavenly court sitting in judgement (Dan 7:25,26). And it is for that reason he made sure that people would know the start time for the beasts to arise.

The problem with commentaries and books published under the auspices of religious scholarship is that their research, like that of JWs, is constrained to staying within boundaries of their belief. They may not like to admit to being hampered in this way but they nonetheless are. You no doubt know it takes strong resolve and courage to break free. Also what needs to be remembered is that scholastic institutions only teach what others before them have written and taught - studying numerous volumes of literature about the Bible and all that church fathers have written. Once all that has been absorbed, most are blindsided, unable to read and understand scripture from a different perspective, namely the writer's perspective.

Love,
LRW~

AmosAu2
Posts: 440
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#9 Post by AmosAu2 » 2 years ago

Hi LRW,

This is an excellent post. It follows some extensive study I've been doing recently.

Your views on the Reformation & what follows, are the same as mine. We will ALL remain blindsided if we don't begin to do our own research & study
For several years I've been doing studies with another brother here in AU, including substantial interests into Daniel. As yet we haven't reached a definitive conclusion. I've recently stumbled upon some excellent notes in a very old bible. We are finding this is very revealing & has given us another perspective that we'd not previously considered. Our discussions are ongoing at this stage.

Regards, Amos.

Get out of her
Posts: 969
Joined: 4 years ago

Re: Kingdoms of Daniel 2 & 7: The Traditional View

#10 Post by Get out of her » 2 years ago

Bobcat wrote:
What is the "traditional view"? Basically it holds that the metallic image of Daniel 2 is portraying the same kingdoms as the four beasts of Daniel 7. Gold=Babylon, Silver=Medo-Persia, Copper/Brass=Greece, Iron=Rome.

Various explanations and commentary on these two chapters differ on the details. But the so-called 'traditional view' generally holds to this basic comparative structure between those two chapters of Daniel.
Hopefully I can contribute something worthwhile to this discussion. I realize this may come as a shock to everyone, but when it comes to this particular topic or issue I happen to see things as not quite so deep or complicated even if it might require some amount of dialogue to effectively articulate.

You might notice that the vision of this sequence of world powers covered in Daniel 2 is explicitly identified as merely an "image" or mere reflection of something. (Da 2:31) The march of world powers portrayed in Chapter 7 of Daniel by contrast is presented as more of a reality rather than a mere shadow or reflection.

This very same phenomenon is repeated yet again in the book of Revelation, but in exactly the reverse sequence. In Chapter 13 of Revelation we are presented with a vision of a "seven headed ten horned wild beast," while in Chapter 17 on the other hand we encounter something that while appearing very similar, is nonetheless distinguished once again as merely an "image" of the reality. (Re 13:14 17:3)

So the questions this raises would naturally seem to be –what exactly is this distinction of both reality and "image" being portrayed with this prophetic sequence of world powers, why might it be so important to grasp, and why do we find this same phenomenon also represented in reverse progression? How about we address these questions one at a time.

What exactly is this distinction between the image and the reality, and why might it be so important to grasp?

First of all we can be certain it's no coincidence the exact word chosen here was "image" as opposed to perhaps something like reflection or shadow. Throughout the scriptures we find images consistently being associated with idols or otherwise objects of actual worship, and as it turns out this particular instance is no exception. In both Chapter 3 of Daniel as well as Chapter 13 of Revelation we suddenly find EVEN GOD'S OWN PEOPLE (or more precisely what WERE his people) suddenly in a position of actually worshiping these particular "images" as opposed to God. (Da 3:6) (Re 13:15) Once we grasp that it is at least largely this exact distinction of idolatry verses true worship that is being depicted between the reality and the "image," the importance of grasping the difference should become self evident.

You might have noticed this raises YET ANOTHER question however. This would be—what is the event that CAUSES or CREATES this situation in which God's own people suddenly find themselves (and rest assured UNKNOWINGLY in at least most cases) immersed in idolatrous false worship on a national scale? It so happens the answer to THIS question is exactly the same answer to why we find this same phenomenon of reversal consistently being assigned to these "images" as well as their realities.

One of the many clues to this cause or pivotal event can actually be found right there in the opening verses of Daniel chapter 7 where we once again are presented with more of a REALITY as opposed to a fake or counterfeit that is being worshiped as a disgusting and unclean idol. (Replacement Christ or Antichrist?) (Strong's #473) Compare (Da 11:31)

Beginning in verse 4 you might notice first of all that this same concept of reversal is once again reinforced or confirmed. Here we find this entity being represented as something that HAD BEEN an unclean thing (like an idol of false worship?) suddenly having its "wings of an eagle" (one of the things used to represent spiritual uncleanness throughout the scriptures) "plucked out" and "lifted up" as well as even being "given the heart of a MAN" as opposed to that of a "wild beast." (Le 11:13)

You see in stark contrast with an unclean "image" or idol of false worship, there was long ago foretold to be "times" (exactly "SEVEN times" in fact) in which God's people would "FALL" to worshiping something that would somehow manage to "REPLACE" the Christ as if it were a "REPLACEMENT Christ" or "ANTI-Christ." (Da 4:23) (Re 14:8 18:2-4) It might initially SEEM or APPEAR to be rather similar to the Christ, as if it were an "image" or a reflection of it. But the reality might be that one would actually require the experiencing of an outpouring of holy spirit upon themselves in order to "catch sight" of the fact that what WAS a clean and legitimate manifestation of theocratic power and authority is now suddenly a "disgusting thing that causes desolation standing in the holy place." ("Antichrist") (Mt 24:15, 16)

Yes the fact that this would ultimately occur "seven times" during the foretold period in which God's people would experience being hosted by a foreign nation as part of their punishment for always seeming to want to crawl into bed with one would in turn mean that this would all ultimately constitute a cycle or "circuit" of events such as the cycle of a week. (Mt 10:23)

As long as these foreign host nations treated God's exiled people with respect and kindness as opposed to treating them like oppressed and enslaved captives, EVEN THEY (or at least their kings) were recognized by God not only as being clean, but in fact even "ANOINTED." (Isa 45:1) In other words, this would comprise the "great city" or "Babylon the Great" in a STANDING position as opposed to a "fallen" one. (Re 14:8) Just as there would be "seven" "falls" throughout the course of this foretold period of foreign exile, there would correspondingly be seven manifestations of (among other things) the "ANTICHRIST" or "disgusting thing that causes desolation standing in the holy place." (Mt 24:15, 16)

These seven acts of spiritual adultery and their corresponding spiritual deaths on the part of God's nation or "woman" would in turn initiate a cycle of events that would include seven spiritual cleansings and rebirths. ("Baptisms") (2 Ki 5:14) (1 Sa 2:5) (Jer 14:9) A cycle in turn always ends in exactly the reverse manner in which it begins, and I would propose this is exactly the reason we consistently find this phenomenon of reversal being presented to us throughout the scriptures.
Bobcat wrote:
Dan 2:4 through the end of Daniel 7 is written in Aramaic. Aramaic was the "lingua franca during this period; its origins and usage were not restricted to the Babylonians." (NET footnote 11 for Dan 2:4.) The rest of Daniel is written in Hebrew.
I very strongly suspect the reason we encounter this particular phenomenon is for exactly the same reason we find Daniel and his "three companions" at times presented with their Hebrew names while at other times being represented with the Babylonian names that were assigned them by king Nebuchadnezzar. (Da 1:6, 7)

Particularly when we understand that in Hebrew culture in particular the assigning of a name to someone actually represented the taking of ownership of them (much in the way in which a wife takes on the last name of her husband), we begin to recognize that periods of time are being represented here in Daniel in which ultimately both God and Satan actually take or exchange ownership of us human beings corresponding with the "seven times" in which we would actually sell ourselves out to satan like spiritual "harlots." These foretold unfaithful alliances formed between God's appointed shepherding class and the "king of the north" was exactly what was being symbolized with betrayals such as that of Judas Iscariot in the first century. (Da 11:30-32)

Each and every "time" this occurs, what WAS Israel or even true Christianity (SPIRITUAL Israel) BECOMES the "great city (Babylon the Great in a "FALLEN" condition) which in a SPIRITUAL sense is called Sodom and Egypt, WHERE THEIR LORD WAS ALSO IMPALED." (Re 11:8) The ancient LITERAL locations or settings were actually being used all along to typify or symbolically represent/foreshadow the corresponding FIGURATIVE or SPIRITUAL settings that the subsequent Christian nation would find itself in depending on whether they at the moment were undergoing a spiritual death ("planting" or "sowing") or a spiritual resurrection. (Rebirth or "harvest")

What this means in part is that I largely do not accept the official JW narrative about what is being represented with (among other things) this vision of four wild beasts found here in Daniel Chapter 7. For example while admittedly more than one thing is at times being represented simultaneously with merely one figure or symbol, I at least primarily (if not exclusively) recognize the "four horns" mentioned in verse 7 and 8 as distinguishing themselves in some manner from the "ten" as symbolizing something rather different from what we were always taught.

I personally see the initial three mentioned as at least primarily representing the final three foretold manifestations of the "fourth beast" or the Roman world power that would exist all the up until the long anticipated Millennial Reign. In other words we are right back up to exactly what is reflected also in Revelation, which is of course ultimately a SEVEN headed entity, even if the final three manifestations of it proved to be essentially nothing more than new manifestations of the "fourth wild beast." But what about this final eighth "horn" mentioned in verse 8 as REPLACING the initial three? (REPLACEMENT Christ or "ANTICHRIST"?) (Da 7:8)

Yes I'm insisting that this final horn corresponds directly with the "eighth king" of Revelation 17:11 or "IMAGE of the wild beast" that suddenly becomes a "disgusting" idol of false worship for even God's own people when his marriage covenants are broken with spiritual adultery on the part of his appointed shepherding class.

Once again we can observe this phenomenon of a reversal associated with a cycle being portrayed here. While the FIRST of these four beasts is presented as STARTING OUT being a "loathsome" or unclean entity which then BECOMES something clean or "standing upright," the exact same thing occurs yet again at the very END of this vision, but in REVERSE. Moreover we might notice that it is PRECISELY the arrival or manifestation of this final EIGHTH manifestation or "disgusting IMAGE" of the wild beast which (just as in the case also in Revelation 17) brings God's final judgments against satan's entire political and religious system of things. (Da 7:9-14) Compare (Re 17)

Agape love;
Sol

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests