SUMMARY OF DANIEL'S PROPHECIES

Click here for links to other Daniel pages.

Scripture quotes are from the NIV. Artwork is by Paul Lee Tan © Bible Communications, Inc. [www.tanbible.com]. Click on the artwork to be taken to Tan's site and an enlargement of the picture.

The yellow cells highlight kingdoms in the various prophecies that are identified by Scripture and/or by history. When the prophecies are arranged this way in the table, the identity of kingdoms in white cells becomes obvious.

The following table is generally true. However, there are always exceptions in real life. The terms are used in the commentary that follows.

[1] "You are the head of gold," says Daniel to Nebuchadnezzar (2:38).

[2] The interpretation only indicates that the second kingdom following Nebuchadnezzar's will be inferior to the former (2:39a). Historically the next kingdom was that of the Medes and Persians consolidated by Cyrus. Though in land area the Medo-Persian kingdom was "greater" than the Babylonian, in administration and leadership the Medo-Persian kingdom was inferior to the Babylonian kingdom. Some critics have sought to identify the second kingdom only with the Medes and the third kingdom only with the Persians in an effort to remove the predictive element of the book assuming a late date for the writing of the book (John F. Walvoord, Daniel, the Key to Prophetic Revelation, pages 65-67). However, the Medes and the Persians were consolidated in 550 BC (John Bright, A History of Israel, 2d ed., page 354; W. White, Jr., Media, The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, volume 4, pages 148, 150) prior to the fall of the first kingdom, Babylon, in 539 BC (John Bright, A History of Israel, 2d ed., pages 360-361).

[3] The interpretation only indicates that the third kingdom "will rule over all the earth (2:39b)." Historically the next kingdom was that of the Greeks. By the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC, he had conquered the Medo-Persian kingdom along with more land area than the Babylonian or Medo-Persian kings had incorporated (John F. Walvoord, Daniel, the Key to Prophetic Revelation, page 66; E. A. Judge, Alexander, The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, volume 1, pages 97-98). Alexander finally defeated Persia in 331 BC (John Bright, A History of Israel, 2d ed., page 415).

[4] The strength assigned to this kingdom (2:40) associates it with the tactics of the Roman kingdom. The Greek kingdom effectively fell to the Roman kingdom in 190 BC (Ibid., page 420). The diversity of the kingdom's composition results in its susceptibility to destruction (2:34-35, 41-43). "Those kings" in verse 44 may speak of the major kings associated with the four kingdoms or may open the way for the assignment of a king to each of the toes of verse 41, but the book does not yet develop the latter possibility in detail. See note [9], below.

[5] The eternal kingdom that destroys the fourth and previous kingdoms (2:44) is certainly future. The implication is that in some way the fourth kingdom continues yet today or that there is an interruption in the flow of history not explained in this prophecy. The fact, that the symbol for the final kingdom is uncut by human hands, associates a unique Divine control over it (i.e., the Messianic kingdom; 2:45). The fact that the stone expands to a mountain filling the whole earth implies the absolute comprehensiveness of the final kingdom (2:35). See Daniel 7:14 and the discussion below.

Amillennialists believe that the final kingdom began with the first advent of Christ. However, history does not support such an interpretation. Several influences besides Christianity attributed to the fall of the ancient Roman Empire (e.g., civil war, poor administration, invaders; Thomas P. Gorter, Jr., Ancient Rome, The American Education Encyclopedia, volume 12, page R-191). The end of the Ancient Roman Empire did not come in a single, decisive event as described in verses 34-35 but rather the empire degenerated over a period of perhaps 300 years (Ibid.). Culver adds that the church is not a political force as are the kingdoms in the prophecy and that the church is not to challenge those who rule but rather to submit to them (Robert Duncan Culver, Daniel and the Latter Days, rev. ed., pages 132-133). If this portion of the prophecy is to be fulfilled as literally as its earlier portions, the final kingdom is not yet on the scene.

[6] All agree that the lion represents Nebuchadnezzar and Babylon. The four beasts came from the sea. The sea probably represents the Gentiles as it does in Isaiah 21:1; Jeremiah 47:7; 50:42; Ezekiel 26:16; and Revelation 18:21.

[7] Liberals, who do not believe in supernatural activities, often identify the second kingdom with the Medes. Their purpose is to identify all the kingdoms with kingdoms that were active before the second century BC when someone, not Daniel, wrote the book and took his name. According to them, although the author presented the material as prophecy, he actually looked back over historical kingdoms to gather his information.

Conservatives identify the kingdom with the Median and Persian kingdom. They note that Daniel understands that both the Medes and the Persians were considered to be incorporated into one kingdom (Daniel 6:8, 12, 15). Furthermore, the Persians absorbed the Medes in 550 BC, several years before they took Babylon in 539 BC. See note [2], above.

The fact that the bear is raised up on one side (Daniel 7:5) is interpreted by conservatives to illustrate the unbalanced partnership in the kingdom of the Medes and Persians where the Persians were the senior partners (John F. Walvoord, Daniel, the Key to Prophetic Revelation, page 156). Conservative scholars do not agree on the interpretation of the three ribs, but they usually interpret the eating of flesh to represent the nations the kingdom will conquer after it conquered Babylon.

[8] Liberals identify this kingdom with the Persians--see above.

Conservatives understand that it represents the Greek kingdom. The four heads are thought to represent the four generals who divided the Greek kingdom into four parts upon the death of Alexander the Great.

Data above is from John F. Walvoord, Daniel, the Key to Prophetic Revelation, page 184.

[9] The Beast with Iron Teeth, Ten Horns, and a Little Horn:

1. The Beast:

Liberals identify the beast with the Greeks--see above.

Conservatives identify it with Rome. Rome was known for its ruthlessness in conquering nations. They note that the fourth kingdom ends with the establishment of an eternal kingdom. They believe the liberal interpretation is wrong because an eternal kingdom did not follow the Greek.

Amillennialists explain the fourth beast as the Roman Empire expiring in the fifth century AD (Robert Duncan Culver, Daniel and the Latter Days, rev. ed., page 137).

2. The Ten Horns:

Postmillennialists interpret the ten horns as ten successive or contemporaneous kings who ruled in various parts of the Roman Empire (Ibid., page 136).

Amillennialists interpret them as a number of kingdoms that succeeded the Roman kingdom (Ibid.).

Premillennialists are unable to identify these ten horns with any historical kings and so assume they are yet future. They note the parallels in Revelation 12:3; 13:1; 17:12, 16 are yet future and that the kings are contemporary (Revelation 17:12). The ten toes of chapter 2 and the ten horns of chapter 7 probably represent the same kings.

3. The Little Horn:

Liberals identify the little horn with Antiochus Epiphanes who died in 163 BC.

Conservatives agree that he attacked the Jewish religion, but believe the blasphemy committed by the little horn as reported by the Bible exceeds that of Antiochus Epiphanes.

Amillennialists understand the little horn to be a final Gentile king who will be destroyed at the Second Advent (Ibid., page 137).

Postmillennialists believe him to be the pope or the papal system (Ibid., 136).

Premillennialists believe he is a future king since he cannot be adequately connected with a historical figure. He is commonly called the antichrist (Revelation 13:1).

Walvoord believes the "alternations in times and law (Daniel 7:25)" refers to how the little horn will change the observances and traditions of those who would normally worship God (e.g., Daniel 9:27; 2 Thessalonians 2:4; Revelation 13:15).

[10] Ancient of Days Slays the Beasts:

1. The Saints

To amillennialists the saints (Daniel 7:18) make up the church of the New Testament who will suffer special persecution at the end of this age.

Premillennialists understand them to make up Israel in the tribulation.

Verse 27 is the key to the identity of the saints. Although NASV and KJV translate the phrase "the people of the saints," the grammar also permits the translation found in NIV, "the saints, the people." NIV's translation indicates the saints are people whereas NASV and KJV could permit them to be angels (as in Daniel 4:10, 14, 20).

That they are God's people is supported by the fact that the New Testament indicates that saints (the church) will reign with Christ in His kingdom (1 Peter 2:9; Revelation 1:6; 3:21; 5:10) as well as tribulation and Old Testament believers (Revelation 20:6). The saints of Daniel 7:18, 22, 27 are also incorporated into Christ's kingdom. Thus they are probably believers--no doubt Old Testament believers since Daniel is written to exiled Jews and "Saints" is never used of the church in the Old Testament.

2. The Eternal Kingdom

Amillennialists believe the eternal kingdom is the church.

Postmillennialists believe the church will gradually establishe the eternal kingdom.

Premillennialists first note that the church was not a significant contributor to the downfall of the historic Roman Empire:

Edward Gibbon in his classic work on the Roman Empire enumerates 'four principal causes of the ruin of Rome, which continued to operate in a period of more than a thousand years. I. The injuries of time and nature. II. The hostile attacks of the barbarians and Christians. III. The use and abuse of the materials. And, IV. The domestic quarrels of the Romans.' While undoubtedly the presence of the church in growing power in the declining Roman Empire was a factor in its history, and Gibbon includes, 'the rise, establishment, and sects of Christianity' in a detailed list of factors contributing to the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, it is quite clear to everyone that the church was not a major factor and in no ways can be identified as a sudden and catastrophic cause for the fall of the Roman Empire. Although the church dominated Europe during the Middle Ages, its power began to be disrupted by the Protestant Reformation at the very time that the Roman Empire was gasping its last in the fifteenth century. Although the power and influence of the Roman Catholic church is recognized by everyone, it does not fulfill the prophecy of Daniel 7:23, that the fourth kingdom 'shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.' This would require figurative interpretation of prophecy far beyond any correspondence to the facts of either prophecy or history (John F. Walvoord, Daniel, the Key to Prophetic Revelation, page 169).

Premillennialists also insist that, like the rest of the kingdoms, it must be a political kingdom not just a spiritual kingdom. Furthermore, the final kingdom is presented in Daniel as following, not happening at the same time as, the fourth kingdom. Finally, the Bible presents the final kingdom as a kingdom of power and glory whereas the present age retains suffering and cross bearing.

[11] There are four schools of interpretation of the prophecy in chapter 8:

1. Historical

• Liberals identify the little horn of Daniel 8 with the little horn of Daniel 9. Not believing that prophecy is possible, they think a writer other than Daniel wrote the book after the events occurred. Thus chapter 8 has been completely fulfilled in history and has no reference to the future according to this interpretation. The fourth beast of chapter 7 is Greece as is the goat of chapter 8. The little horn of both chapters is Antiochus Epiphanes in this interpretation (Ibid., pages 192-193).

• Some amillennialists believe that the two little horns of chapters 7 and 8 are different but that chapter 8 is completely fulfilled in history. Thus for this interpretation there is no need for a future age (the tribulation) in which the antichrist appears and is destroyed by Christ at His second advent to install the millennium (Ibid., page 193).

• The problem with the liberal and amillennial interpretations is that Daniel uses "the time of the end" as a time future even to us in the twenty-first century (Daniel 11:35, 40). Thus, at least part of chapter 8 must remain to be fulfilled (Ibid.).

2. Future

• This position understands that the little horns of chapters 7 and 8 are the same but the entire chapter is prophetic and to be fulfilled yet in the future. They believe the description of the little horn of chapter 8 goes beyond Antiochus Ephphanes. Furthermore, some argue that the four horns of chapter 8 representing the later four divisions of the Greek empire upon Alexander the Great's death were each absorbed eventually by the Roman Empire. Therefore, the little horn growing from one of the previous four must represent, according to this interpretation, a kingdom found within the Roman Empire.

• The problem with this interpretation is that the Roman Empire is clearly not in view in chapter 8. The little horn of chapter 8 grows out of one of the kingdoms--not that he represents a later kingdom. Thus, the little horn of chapter 8 is a part of one division of the Greek empire. In chapter 7 the little horn grows out of the beast itself indicating that it is a part of the Roman beast (Ibid.).

3. Dual Fulfillment--The Scofield Bible teaches that all of chapter 8 has been historically fulfilled in Antiochus Epiphanes, but that it is at the same time a prophecy of the age of the Second Advent starting at verse 17. Others believe the whole chapter is designed to have dual fulfillment (Ibid., pages 194-195).

4. Typological--This interpreter understands that verses 1-22 were completely fulfilled in the Mede and Persian and the Greek empires and that the events of these empires were designed to be illustrations of the age associated with the second advent (verse 17). However, verses 23-26 are subject to future fulfillment since a better translation of the first line of verse 23 indicates that the topic is the period following the rule of the four kingdoms following Alexander the Great; a better translation of the second line of verse 23 indicates the activity of the transgressors (verses 12-13) has passed; and since some of the descriptions of the king in verses 23-26 do not correspond to Antiochus Epiphanes: ". . . not by his own power, . . . (verse 24)," and ". . . will even oppose the Prince of princes, . . . (verse 25)." A better translation of verse 23 is, "In the period following their rule, when the transgressors have finished . . ."

5. Some Additional Observations:

• The Persian kings wore the head of a ram instead of a crown when they led their armies (Ibid., page 182).

• Destruction of the Ram (8:7)--Alexander the Great destroyed the Medes and Persians during 334-331 BC (Ibid., page 183).

• The Large Horn (8:8)--This refers to the untimely death of Alexander the Great. "Partly due to a strenuous exertion, his dissipated life, and a raging fever, Alexander died in a drunken debauch at Babylon, not yet 33 years of age (Ibid., page 184)."

• Four Conspicuous Horns (8:8)--After Alexander the Great died, four kingdoms ultimately divided up his empire. See the table, above.

• Rather Small Horn (8:9)--Antiochus Epiphanes put Egypt under his influence as well as Syria and Palestine (1 Maccabees 1:10, 16-64). This is why it can be said that he ". . . grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the Beautiful Land."

[12] Click here for more information on Daniel 9.

© 2002, Ken Bowles, September 22, 2002, Edition

Advertising appearing in conjunction with this page is not endorsed.