Well, it has certainly been a while
since I've written an article. Unfortunately, with summer comes
baseball and softball tournaments, which, of course, means I am
actually kept busy at work for once. But more than that, I've had
some difficulties feeling motivated. I thought, “Why not try to
write something and see what happens? Perhaps it will be all I need
to jump over this hurdle [or mountain] of writer's block.” Let's
see what happens.
Not too long
ago, I was confronted by a Historicist claiming that the “little
horn” of Daniel 8 is the same “little horn” of Daniel 7. I
found this to be incorrect. I still
find this to be incorrect. However, the smallest detail had always
eluded me, and it is something that has eluded countless others, I
believe. And when I share this with you, I hope you have the same
reaction I had: “Uh...duh!”
Thus,
the focus of this article will be Daniel 7 and 8. I simply wish to share some
observations with you as we study the scriptures together.
Identifying
the Beasts
Daniel
7 is at the heart of prophetic texts pertaining to the last
days.
And while much of Christendom is united in a general interpretation
of which kingdoms the four beasts of Daniel 7 represent, there are
still those who have their own interpretations. Let's first observe
the text, then draw our conclusions:
2I
Daniel beheld, and, lo, the four winds of heaven blew violently upon
the great sea. 3And there came up four great beasts out of the sea,
differing from one another. 4The first was a lionness, and her wings
as an eagle's; I beheld until her wings were plucked, and she was
lifted off from the earth, and she stood on human feet, and a man's
heart was given to her. 5And, behold, a second beast like a bear, and
it supported itself on one side, and there were three ribs in its
mouth, between its teeth: and thus they said to it, Arise, devour
much flesh. 6And after this one I looked, and behold another wild
beast as a leopard, and it had four wings of a bird upon it: and the
wild beast had four heads, and power was given to it. 7After this one
I looked, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and
exceedingly strong, and its teeth were of iron; devouring and
crushing to atoms, and it trampled the remainder with its feet: and
it was altogether different from the beasts that were before it; and
it had ten horns. 8I noticed his horns, and behold, another little
horn came up in the midst of them, and before it three of the former
horns were rooted out: and, behold, there were eyes as the eyes of a
man in this horn, and a mouth speaking great things. (Daniel 7:2-8)
What
we have here are four beasts. I believe these beasts represent
Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Consider the following:
Babylon:
When
prophesying of the coming of Babylon against Judah, Jeremiah wrote:
5Declare
ye in Juda, and let it be heard in Jerusalem: say ye, Sound the
trumpet in the land; cry ye aloud: say ye, gather yourselves
together, and let us enter in to the fortified cities. 6Gather up
your wares and flee to Sion, stay not: for I will bring
evils from the north,
and great destruction. 7The lion
is gone up from his lair, he has roused himself to the destruction of
the nations, and has gone forth out of his place, to make the land
desolate; and the cities shall be destroyed, so as to be without
inhabitant. (Jeremiah 4:5-7)
Jerusalem
had been called to repentance so that they could be saved from the
coming wrath of the Babylonian kingdom (Jeremiah 4:14). As we know,
they did not repent, and Babylon came at them like a lion, just as
the Lord declared. This harmonizes with Daniel's vision in Daniel 7.
In Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed of a colossal figure in the image
of a man. This figure was made of various metals. The head, which was
made of gold, was identified by Daniel as the Babylonian kingdom
(Daniel 2:38-39). Nebuchadnezzar's dream correlates with Daniel's own
vision in Daniel 7, and therefore, we are to interpret the lion as
Babylon.
Medo-Persia:
Identifying
what the bear in Daniel 7 represents is quite simple to do. The
kingdom which followed Babylon was that of the Medes and Persians.
When Medo-Persia conquered Babylon they also managed to take Lydia
and Egypt, symbolized by the three ribs in the bear's mouth. The fact
that this bear was raised up on one side likely symbolizes the
dominance of Persian power over the Medes.
Isaiah
prophesied against Babylon quite some time before the kingdom's fall.
And who did God promise to stir up against them? The Medes:
17Behold,
I will stir up against you the Medes, who do not regard silver,
neither have they need of gold. (Isaiah 13:17).
Therefore,
I find it accurate to identify the second beast of Daniel 7 as the
Medo-Persian empire.
Leopard:
In
Daniel 8, Daniel prophesied of a ram and goat. This was two years
after his dream in Daniel 7. The ram depicted the kings of Media and
Persia (Daniel 8:20), and the goat depicted Greece (Daniel 8:21).
Daniel's vision of the ram and goat portrays the Greeks overthrowing
Medo-Persia (Daniel 8:5-7), and therefore, identifying the leopard of
Daniel 7.
I
believe the leopard was used to portray swiftness. Alexander the
Great, arguably the greatest conqueror in history, expanded his
kingdom with more ferocity than kingdoms before him, and he did so
with great speed. When he died, his kingdom was divided between his
four generals. Notice that the leopard has four wings and four heads
(Daniel 7:6). I believe one of these sets of four (likely the heads)
represents this division. Likewise, we read in Daniel 8 of broken
horn on the goat, which spawned four more horns in its place. I
believe this broken horn is Alexander the Great, and the four horns
in his place are his generals.
Fourth
Beast:
A
number of scholars believe the fourth, indescribable beast of Daniel
7 is the Seleucid empire from which Antiochus IV Epiphanes would
come. A few things weigh against this. For starters, Gabriel
attributes the power of Antiochus IV Epiphanes to one of the horns
spawned from the fall of Alexander the Great. Pay attention to the
context:
21The
he-goat is the King of the Greeks: and the great horn which was
between his eyes, he is the first king. 22And as for the one that was
broken,
in whose place there stood up four
horns,
four kings shall arise out of his nation, but not in their own
strength. 23And at the latter time of their
kingdom, when their
sins are coming to the full, there shall arise a king bold in
countenance, and understanding riddles. 24And his power shall be
great, and he shall destroy wonderfully, and prosper, and practise,
and shall destroy mighty men, and
the holy people.
(Daniel 8:21-24).
The
one that would come and destroy the holy people was Antiochus IV
Epiphanes. Daniel says he would come from the division of the Grecian
empire. While the Seleucid empire is distinct from the Grecian empire
of Alexander the Great, this terrible and mighty king who would
destroy the holy people was still being attributed to the power and
image of the goat by Gabriel.
A
second strike against the Seleucid view is a rather simple one. In
Daniel 7, Daniel notes that the fourth beast would “excel all other
kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth” (Daniel 7:23). The
Seleucid empire, while quite ferocious, did not obtain the same power
the of the Roman empire. Encyclopedia Brittanica notes the following:
“The Seleucid kingdom began losing control over large territories
in the 3rd
century BC. An inexorable decline followed the first defeat of the
Seleucids by the Romans in 190.” The Seleucid empire did maintain its power for a fair share of time,
but it hardly had the power of the Roman empire. This empire had a
difficult time holding onto its larger territories.
Another
strike against the Seleucid view is that Daniel prophesies of the
coming of the Messiah during the time of this fourth beast. When the
“little horn” “shall wear out the saints of the Most High,”
the everlasting kingdom of the Most High would be given to the saints
(Daniel 7:27). Nebuchadnezzar's dream also depicted God's kingdom at
this time (Daniel 2:44-45). This is depicted again in Daniel 7:9-14.
Is
the “Little Horn” of Daniel 7 the same "Little Horn" of Daniel 8?
As
stated earlier, Historicists claim that the “little horn” of
Daniel 7 is the same as the “little horn” of Daniel 8. The logic
behind this is that we should be interpreting scripture with
scripture, and since Daniel 7 has a “little horn,” the “little
horn” in Daniel 8 must apparently be the same figure. However,
we've already begun dismantling this position, for the persecuting
power in Daniel 7 is part of the fourth beast, which is not
the same as the goat in Daniel 8, earlier identified as the Grecian
empire.
I
will elaborate on this a little further in due time, but for now I'd
like to observe something else. At the beginning of this article I
had mentioned finally coming across something that had eluded me.
That which eluded me has to do with this “little horn” in Daniel
7. The question that came to mind was, “Which
little horn?” What do I mean? Glad you asked. Note the following:
7After
this one I looked, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible,
and exceedingly strong, and its teeth were of iron; devouring and
crushing to atoms, and it trampled the remainder with its feet: and
it was altogether different from the beasts that were before it; and
it had ten horns.
8I noticed his horns, and behold, another
little
horn
came up in the midst of them, and before it three of the former horns
were rooted out: and, behold, there were eyes as the eyes of a man in
this horn, and a mouth speaking great things. (Daniel 7:7-8).
This
is the first instance in which we read of the fourth beast's horns.
This beast had ten horns. Were they large? Were they small? Notice
that Daniel says “another
little
horn”
came up. How could there be another
one if none of the other horns were little? Have you ever noticed how
numerous interpretations rely on this horn's size to determine the
figure it represents? This is not to say whether I agree or disagree
with this interpretation, but note the fact that a number of
Preterists identify this “little horn” as Titus, son of emperor
Vespasian. Titus, who was not yet emperor, is the one who laid waste
to Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Because he was not yet emperor, many see him
as “little,” or inferior to his father. But is this necessarily
the accurate way to interpret the eleventh horn? Even if the
interpretation itself is correct, the text doesn't actually portray
this “little horn” as a different size than the others, for it is
“another
little
horn,”
suggesting that there are others
of similar size.
I,
too, have tried to interpret the eleventh horn according to its size.
However, I'm not certain that's actually accurate. Thus, when we read
of a “little horn” in Daniel 8, we can't actually interpret it
the way some claim we should, for all of the horns on the fourth
beast in Daniel 7 are seemingly “little.” Historicists could do
themselves a greater service to rely solely on the characteristics of
the two horns to find correlation, instead. The point I am trying to
make is that I believe Historicists, and others who interpret
similarly (Partial Preterist James B. Jordan comes to mind), cannot
maintain a consistent interpretation by these means. (James B. Jordan
believes the horns in Daniel 7 are the Herods, and thus, the “little
horn” of Daniel 8 must also be a Herod. I don't wish to determine
whether he is correct or incorrect, but simply point out his
hermeneutic. For more on this, read his commentary on the book of
Daniel.)
My
scripture citations have come from the Septuagint, the Greek
translation of Old Testament. In order to read of a “little horn”
in Daniel 8, an alternate translation must be used. I'll switch to
the King James Version for this:
8Therefore
the he goat waxed very great: and when he was strong, the great horn
was broken; and for it came up four notable ones toward the four
winds of heaven. 9And out of one of them came forth a little horn,
which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east,
and toward the pleasant land. 10And it waxed great, even to the host
of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and of the stars to the
ground, and stamped upon them. (Daniel 8:8-10 KJV)
This
“little horn” is simply a “strong horn” in the Septuagint.
This horn is most certainly strong, too! The similarities between
this “little horn” and the one in Daniel 7 are also quite
obvious. Both of these horns are persecuting powers and maintain
quite the strength. So, the similarities are certainly there.
However, the Historicist interpretation crumbles when one understands
that the “little horn” of Daniel 8 comes from one of the four
horns that spawned from the great horn of the goat! Again, when
Alexander died his kingdom was divided among his four
generals. Of this division was the Seleucid empire from which
Antiochus IV Epiphanes would come. Therefore, if the Seleucid empire
was one of the four “notable [horns]” of the Grecian empire, and
a “little horn” would come from one such horn, then clearly the
“little horn” of Daniel 8 cannot
be the “little horn,” or eleventh horn, of Daniel 7! Gabriel
concurs when he identifies the goat as the Grecian empire. The
“little horn” in question comes from this
empire, not the Roman empire.
Conclusion
I
believe the Historicists are doing the best they can to interpret
Daniel 8 with consistency. I do not believe they are coming to the
proper conclusions, however. Gabriel did all of the interpretation
for Daniel. There is no
question as to what the ram and goat of Daniel 8 are representing,
for Gabriel explained all of this. Historicists, therefore, must
ignore Gabriel's explanation of the prophecy's imagery. They
improperly attribute this prophecy's fulfillment to the time of the
fourth beast. But as we have seen, the goat of Daniel 8 is the
Grecian empire, which was the third
beast of Daniel 7, not the fourth.
I believe we do ourselves a disservice to base our interpretation of
the eleventh horn of Daniel 7 on the characteristic of size, as well
as identify the “little horn” of Daniel 8 as the same “little
horn” in Daniel 7. The text doesn't actually support such a
distinction between the eleventh horn and the other ten. Since
probably 99% or more of Christendom refers to the eleventh horn as a
“little horn,” it is accurate to assume that the majority of
Christians believe there is such a distinction given by the text. And
again, I was one such individual until recently. I find this to be an
error now, however, and simply wish to share this with you for your
own consideration.
Blessings,
Jason Watt
No comments:
Post a Comment