“After this I saw in the night visions, and, behold, there was a fourth animal, awesome and powerful, and exceedingly strong. It had great iron teeth. It devoured and broke in pieces, and stamped the residue with its feet. It was different from all the animals that were before it. It had ten horns.
“I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them another horn, a little one, before which three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots: and behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things.
“I watched until thrones were placed, and one who was ancient of days sat. His clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool. His throne was fiery flames, and its wheels burning fire.
A fiery stream issued and came out from before him. Thousands of thousands ministered to him. Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. The judgment was set. The books were opened.
“I watched at that time because of the voice of the great words which the horn spoke. I watched even until the animal was slain, and its body destroyed, and it was given to be burned with fire. As for the rest of the animals, their dominion was taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.
“I saw in the night visions, and behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. Dominion was given him, and glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which will not pass away, and his kingdom that which will not be destroyed.
“As for me, Daniel, my spirit was grieved within my body, and the visions of my head troubled me. I came near to one of those who stood by, and asked him the truth concerning all this. “So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.
‘These great animals, which are four, are four kings, who will arise out of the earth. But the saints of the Most High will receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.’
“Then I desired to know the truth concerning the fourth animal, which was different from all of them, exceedingly terrible, whose teeth were of iron, and its nails of bronze; which devoured, broke in pieces, and stamped the residue with its feet; and concerning the ten horns that were on its head, and the other horn which came up, and before which three fell, even that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spoke great things, whose look was more stout than its fellows. I saw, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them, until the ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.
“Thus he said, ‘The fourth animal will be a fourth kingdom on earth, which will be different from all the kingdoms, and will devour the whole earth, and will tread it down, and break it in pieces. As for the ten horns, ten kings will arise out of this kingdom. Another will arise after them; and he will be different from the former, and he will put down three kings.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 There is greater difficulty in this Fourth Monarchy. Those…
There is greater difficulty in this Fourth Monarchy. Those who are endued with moderate judgment, confess this vision to be fulfilled in the Roman Empire; but they afterwards disagree, since what is here said of the fourth beast many transfer to the Pope, when it is added a Little Horn sprang up; but others think the Turkish kingdom is comprehended under the Roman. The Jews for the most part incline this way, and they are necessarily compelled to do so, since Daniel will afterwards add — I saw the throne of the Son of Man; since it is clear, from this prediction, that Christ’s kingdom was erected by the overthrow of the Roman dominion, the Jews turn round, and, as I have said, join the Turkish monarchy with the Roman, since they do, not find their Christ according to their imagination. And there are some of our writers who think this image ought not to be restricted to the Roman Empire, but ought to include the Turkish. In nay view, there is nothing probable in that opinion; I have no doubt that in this vision the Prophet was shown the figure of the Roman Empire, and this will be more apparent as we go on.
He says a fourth beast appeared. He gives it no fixed name, because nothing ever existed like it in the world. The Prophet, by adding no similitude, signifies how horrible the monster was, for he formerly compared the Chaldean Empire to a lion, the Persian to a bear, and the Macedonian to a leopard. In these comparisons there was something natural; but when he descends to the fourth beast, he says, it was formidable in its aspect, and terrible, and very brave or strong, and without; any addition calls it “a beast.” We see then his wish to express something prodigious by this fourth beast, as there is no animal so fierce or cruel in the world which can in any way represent with sufficient strength the nature of this beast. Behold, therefore, the fourth beast which was formidable, and fearful, and very strong. We know of no such Monarchy before this. Although Alexander subdued the whole of the East, his victory, we are sure, was not stable. He was content with fame alone; he, granted liberty to all people; and as long as they flattered him, he sought nothing else. But we know the Romans to have been masters even as far as Babylon:; we know the following countries to have been subdued by them: Asia Minor, Syria, Cilicia, Greece, and Macedon, both the Spains, Gaul, Illyricum, and part of Germany. At length Britain was subjugated by Julius Caesar. No wonder this beast is called formidable and very strong! For before Julius Caesar became master of the Empire, the whole Mediterranean Sea was in all its parts under subjection to the Roman Empire. Its amazing extent is well known. Egypt had indeed its own kings, but they were tributary; whatever edicts the Romans decreed, they were executed immediately in Egypt. Mirror sovereigns existed in Asia Minor as a kind of spies, but this state of things we shall treat presently. It is also well known that they possessed supreme power throughout the Mediterranean Sea, and that by the conquest of Mithridates. Pompey reduced Pontus under his dominion. In the East affairs were all at peace. The Medes and Persians gave them some trouble, but they never moved unless they were provoked. The Spains were not yet accustomed to the yoke, but we know that there were always two praetors there. Julius Caesar was the first who entered Britain after subduing Gaul. Hence we see how far and wide the Romans extended their power, and with what immense cruelty. Hence Daniel calls this beast, formidable and very strong
Read full note →
He afterwards adds, It had large iron teeth. This ought to be referred to its audacity and insatiable greediness. We see how completely free their nation was from the fear of death, for they were so hardened that if any one deserted his rank for the sake of avoiding danger, he was afterwards branded with such marks of infamy, that he was compelled either to strangle himself or to incur a voluntary death! There was, then, a certain brutal cruelty in that nation, and we also know how insatiable they were. For this reason Daniel says they had large iron teeth. He adds, it consumed, and broke to pieces, and trod the remnant under foot. These things are spoken allegorically, not only because this vision was offered to the holy Prophet, but also because God wished to paint a kind of living image, in which he might show the peculiar characters of each government. For we know how many lands the Romans had consumed, and how they transferred to themselves the luxuries of the whole world, and whatever was valuable and precious in Asia Minor, and Greece, and Macedonia, as well as in all islands and in Asia Major — all was swept away — and even this was insufficient to satisfy them! This, then, is the ravenousness of which the Prophet now speaks, since they consumed, says he, and rubbed to pieces with their teeth. He adds, they trod the remnant under their feet — a metaphor worthy of notice, as we know they were accustomed to distribute the prey which they could not carry with them. They devoured and tore with their teeth the treasures and costly furniture and everything else; for their supplies were provided by tributes which produced large sums of money. If there was any portion of the Mediterranean which they could not defend without keeping a permanent garrison there, we know how they engaged the services of tributary kings. Thus the kingdom of Eumenes increased to a great extent till the time of his grandson Attalus, but they bestowed it partly on the Rhodians, and partly on the Cyprians and others. They never remunerated those Allies who almost exhausted their own possessions in aiding them, out of their own resources, but enriched them with the spoils of others; and they not only seized upon the property of one city and bestowed it on another, but they set up their lands for sale. Thus, the liberty of the Lacedaemonians was betrayed to the tyrant Nabis. They also enriched Masinissa with so much wealth, that they acquired Africa for themselves by his means. In fine, they so sported with kingdoms in seizing and giving them away, that they rendered provinces tranquil by the wealth and at the expense of others. This was remarkably conspicuous in the case of Judea, where they created out of nothing Ethnarchs and Tetrarchs and kings, who were nothing but their satellites — and that too but for a moment. For as soon as any change occurred, they retracted what they had given as easily as they bestowed it. Hence, this their cunning liberality is called treading under foot; for that remnant which they could not devour and consume with their teeth they trod under foot, as they kept all those whom they had either enriched or increased subject to themselves. Thus we see with what servility they were flattered by those who had obtained anything through their generosity. And how degrading was the slavery of Greece from the time the Romans entered the country! for as each state acquired any new territory, it erected a temple to the Romans. They also sent their ambassadors there to act as spies, who, under the pretense of punishing the neighboring people for ‘plotting against them, enriched themselves by plunder. Thus the Romans held under their feet whatever they had given to others. We see then how suitably and properly the Prophet speaks, when he says, the Romans trod down the remnant; for whatever they could not consume, and what their voraciousness could not devour, they trod under their feet.
He adds afterwards, And this beast different from all the former ones, and had ten horns. When he says, this beast was different from the rest, he confirms what we formerly said, namely, this was a horrible prodigy, and nothing could be compared to it in the nature of things. And surely if any one attentively and prudently considers the origin of the Romans, he would be astonished at their remarkable progress to such great power; for it was an unusual monster, and nothing like it had ever appeared. Interpreters treat in various ways what the Prophet subjoins respecting the ten horns. I follow simple and genuine opinion, namely, the Prophet means this Empire to belong to more persons them one For the angel will afterwards assert the ten horns to be kings; not that so many kings ruled at Rome, according to the foolish dream of the Jews, who are ignorant of all things; but the Prophet here distinguishes the Fourth Monarchy from the rest, as if he had said it should be a popular government, not presided over by one king, but divided into really heads. For they even divided provinces among themselves, and made treaties with each other, so that one was governor of Macedonia, another of Cilicia, and another of Syria. Thus we see how numerous the kingdoms were. And with regard to the number ten, we know this to be a frequent and usual form of speech in Scripture, where ten signifies many. When plurality is denoted, the number ten is used. Thus when the Prophet states the fourth beast to have ten horns, he means, there were many provinces so divided, that each ruler, whether proconsul or praetor, was like a king. For the supreme power was given to them, while the city and Italy were given up to the consuls. The consul could indeed write to the provinces and command whatever he pleased; then he could elevate to honor whom he pleased for the sake of favor and friendship; but each of the praetors and proconsuls when he obtained a province, became a kind of king, since he exercised the supreme power of life and death over all his subjects. We need not be too anxious about the number, as we have already explained it. Those who reckon the Roman provinces make great mistakes; they omit the principal one; they make only one of Spain, and yet we know there were two. They do not divide Gaul, yet there were always two proconsuls there, except under Julius Caesar, who obtained the control of both Gauls. So also they speak of Greece, and yet, neither a proconsul nor s praetor was ever sent into Greece. Finally, the prophet simply means that the Roman Empire was complex, being divided into many provinces, and these provinces were governed by leaders of great weight at Rome, whose authority and rank were superior to others. Proconsuls and proctors obtained the provinces by lot, but favor frequently prevailed, as the histories of those times sufficiently assure us. Let us proceed, —
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24 That which the Romans could not quietly enjoy in…
That which the Romans could not quietly enjoy in other countries, they would give it to other Kings and rulers, that at all times when they would, they might take it again: which liberality is here called the stamping of the rest under the feet.
That is, sundry and divers provinces which were governed by the deputies and proconsuls, whereof everyone might be compared to a King.
Read full note →
That is, the Roman Empire which was a monster, and could not be compared to any beasts, because the nature of none was able to express it.
Signifying, the tyranny and greediness of the Romans.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv7–24 Dan 7:7 After this I saw in the night…
Dan 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it [was] diverse from all the beasts that [were] before it; and it had ten horns.
Ver. 7. Behold a fourth beast.] Not likened to any certain beast, because none can be named so cruel which can express the cruelty of this fourth monarchy - viz., that of the Romans, no, although it were
Read full note →
"Pροσθε λεων, μετοπισθε δρακων, μεσσηδε χιμαιρα." - Hom.
It is a nameless monster, made up of all the properties of the former beasts. {Rev 13:1-2} The Rabbis, with their "wild boar out of the wood," {Psa 80:13} fall far short of it. Luther {a} not unfitly compareth the Church of God to a silly poor maid, sitting in a wood or wilderness, and beset with hungry lions, wolves, boars, bears, and with all manner of hurtful and cruel creatures.
Dreadful and terrible.] Because able and ready to annoy others with great evils.
And strong exceedingly.] So that it passed for a proverb, Irasci populo Romano nemo impune potest. It is not safe for any nation to fall out with the Romans; for they are sure to be tamed and tawed with their iron teeth.
And it had great iron teeth,] i.e., Conquering captains, such as Scipio - of whom Ennius sang thus:
“ Si fas caedendo coelestia scaudere cuiquam,
Mi soli coeli maxima porta patet. ”
Pompey, who by his great acts and achievements merited the name of Magnus; and Julius Caesar, who before the Pharsalian wars had taken a thousand towns, conquered three hundred nations, took prisoner one million men, and slain as many. {b}
And stamped the residue with the feet of it,] i.e., With their provincial magistrates, such as were Verres, Pilate, Felix, &c., said to have nails of brass, {Dan 7:19} and fitly compared to petulant wild beasts, which, when they can feed no longer, trample with their feet on the residue of the prey. The poor Jews had hard measure from them always.
And it was diverse from all the beasts.] In respect of diversity and strange multiplicity of forms of government.
And it had ten horns.] Which the angel afterwards interpreted as kings or kingdoms. {Dan 7:24} This occured not long after Constantine the Great, when the Roman empire began to moulder and fall in pieces. About the year 456, it appeared broken into ten parts, which by a learned interpreter are thus reckoned. The kingdom of the Britons, of the Saxons, both in Brittany; of the Franks, of the Burgundians, in France; of the West Goths in the southern part of France and part of Spain; of the Sueves and Alanes in part of Spain; of the Vandals in Africa, a little before in Spain; of the Allmanns in Rhetia and Noricum, provinces of Germany; of the East Goths in Pannonia, a little after in Italy; of the Greeks in the remnant of the empire.
{a} Loc. Com.
{b} Heyl., Geog.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24 A fourth beast: this was the Roman empire; for…
A fourth beast: this was the Roman empire; for that followed the Grecian, and was monstrous as to his rise and progress.
Stamped the residue with the feet of it. As to the variety and cruelty of the government, it made use not only of Italians, but Spaniards, Gauls, Germans, Britons, which made their armies hardy and hard as iron, which broke in pieces the gold, silver, and brass. But it is plain this is the last kingdom of the Four, that was to be destroyed by Christ’s kingdom, and this work was to be doing till the last age, Dan 7:13.
Read full note →
Ten horns, i.e. kings, Dan 7:24; Rev 17:12, called
horns. i.e. of iron, as the teeth were, i.e. cruel and persecuting; as beasts push and gore with their horns.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On vv9, 15 Whether we understand the fourth beast to signify the…
Whether we understand the fourth beast to signify the Syrian empire, or the Roman, or the former as the figure of the latter, it is plain that these verses are intended for the comfort and support of the people of God in reference to the persecutions they were likely to sustain both from the one and from the other, and from all their proud enemies in every age; for it is written for their learning on whom the ends of the world have come, that they also, through patience and comfort of this scripture, might have hope. Three things are here discovered that are very encouraging: -
I. That there is a judgment to come, and God is the Judge. Now men have their day, and every pretender thinks he should have his day, and struggles for it. But he that sits in heaven laughs at them, for he sees that his day is coming, Psa 37:13. I beheld (Dan 7:9) till the thrones were cast down, not only the thrones of these beasts, but all rule, authority, power, that are set up in opposition to the kingdom of God among men (Co1 15:24): such are the thrones of the kingdoms of the world, in comparison with God's kingdom; those that see them set up need but wait awhile, and they will see them cast down. I beheld till thrones were set up (so it may as well be read), Christ's throne and the throne of his Father. One of the rabbin confesses that these thrones are set up, one for God, another for the Son of David. It is the judgment that is here set, Dan 7:10. Now, 1. This is intended to proclaim God's wise and righteous government of the world by his providence; and an unspeakable satisfaction it gives to all good men, in the midst of the convulsions and revolutions of states and kingdoms, that the Lord has prepared his throne in the heavens and his kingdom rules over all (Psa 103:19), that verily there is a God that judges in the earth, Psa 58:11. 2. Perhaps it points at the destruction brought by the providence of God upon the empire of Syria, or that of Rome, for their tyrannizing over the people of God. But, 3. It seems principally designed to describe the last judgment, for though it follow not immediately upon the dominion of the fourth beast, nay, though it be yet to come, perhaps many ages to come, yet it was intended that in every age the people of God should encourage themselves, under their troubles, with the belief and prospect of it. Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of it, Jde 1:14. Does the mouth of the enemy speak great things, Dan 7:8. Here are far greater things which the mouth of the Lord has spoken. Many of the New Testament predictions of the judgment to come have a plain allusion to this vision, especially St John's vision of it, Rev 20:11, Rev 20:12. (1.) The Judge is the Ancient of days himself, God the Father, the glory of whose presence is here described. He is called the Ancient of days, because he is God from everlasting to everlasting. Among men we reckon that with the ancient is wisdom, and days shall speak; shall not all flesh then be silent before him who is the Ancient of days? The glory of the Judge is here set forth by his garment, which was white as snow, denoting his splendour and purity in all the administrations of his justice; and the hair of his head clean and white, as the pure wool, that, as the white and hoary head, he may appear venerable. (2.) The throne is very formidable. It is like the fiery flame, dreadful to the wicked that shall be summoned before it. And the throne being movable upon wheels, or at least the chariot in which he rode the circuit, the wheels thereof are as burning fire, to devour the adversaries; for our God is a consuming fire, and with him are everlasting burnings, Isa 33:14. This is enlarged upon, Dan 7:10. As to all his faithful friends there proceeds out of the throne of God and the Lamb a pure river of water of life (Rev 22:1), so to all his implacable enemies there issues and comes forth from his throne a fiery stream, a stream of brimstone (Isa 30:33), a fire that shall devour before him. He is a swift witness, and his word a word upon the wheels. (3.) The attendants are numerous and very splendid. The Shechinah is always attended with angels; it is so here (Dan 7:10): Thousand thousands minister to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stand before him. It is his glory that he has such attendants, but much more his glory that he neither needs them nor can be benefited by them. See how numerous the heavenly hosts are (there are thousands of angels), and how obsequious they are - they stand before God, ready to go on his errands and to take the first intimation of his will and pleasure. They will particularly be employed as ministers of his justice in the last judgment day, when the Son of man shall come, and all the holy angels with him. Enoch prophesied that the Lord should come with his holy myriads. (4.) The process is fair and unexceptionable: The judgment is set, publicly and openly, that all may have recourse to it; and the books are opened. As in courts of judgment among men the proceedings are in writing and upon record, which is laid open when the cause comes to a hearing, the examination of witnesses is produced, and affidavits are read, to clear the matter of fact, and the statute and common-law books are consulted to find out what is the law, so, in the judgment of the great day, the equity of the sentence will be as incontestably evident as if there were books opened to justify it.
Read full note →
II. That the proud and cruel enemies of the church of God will certainly be reckoned with and brought down in due time, Dan 7:11, Dan 7:12. This is here represented to us, 1. In the destroying of the fourth beast. God's quarrel with this beast is because of the voice of the great words which the horn spoke, bidding defiance to Heaven, and triumphing over all that is sacred; this provokes God more than any thing, for the enemy to behave himself proudly, Deu 32:27. Therefore Pharaoh must be humbled, because he has said, Who is the Lord? and has said, I will pursue, I will overtake. Enoch foretold that therefore the Lord would come to judge the world, that he might convince all that are ungodly of their hard speeches, Jde 1:15. Note, Great words are but idle words, for which men must give account in the great day. And see what becomes of this beast that talks so big: He is slain, and his body destroyed and given to the burning flame. The Syrian empire, after Antiochus, was destroyed. He himself died of a miserable disease, his family was rooted out, the kingdom wasted by the Parthians and Armenians, and at length made a province of the Roman empire by Pompey. And the Roman empire itself (if we take that for the fourth beast), after it began to persecute Christianity, declined and wasted away, and the body of it was destroyed. So shall all thy enemies perish, O Lord! and be slain before thee. 2. In the diminishing and weakening of the other three beasts (Dan 7:12): They had their dominion taken away, and so were disabled from doing the mischiefs they had done to the church and people of God; but a prolonging in life was given them, for a time and a season, a set time, the bounds of which they could not pass. The power of the foregoing kingdoms was quite broken, but the people of them still remained in a mean, weak, and low condition. We may allude to this in describing the remainders of sin in the hearts of good people; they have corruptions in them, the lives of which are prolonged, so that they are not perfectly free from sin, but the dominion of them is taken away, so that sin does not reign in their mortal bodies. And thus God deals with his church's enemies; sometimes he breaks the teeth of them (Psa 3:7), when he does not break the neck of them, crushes the persecution, but reprieves the persecutors, that they may have space to repent. And it is fit that God, in doing his own work, should take his own time and way.
III. That the kingdom of the Messiah shall be set up, and kept up, in the world, in spite of all the opposition of the powers of darkness. Let the heathen rage and fret as long as they please, God will set his King upon his holy hill of Zion. Daniel sees this in vision, and comforts himself and his friends with the prospect of it. This is the same with Nebuchadnezzar's foresight of the stone cut out of the mountain without hands, which broke in pieces the image; but in this vision there is much more of pure gospel than in that. 1. The Messiah is here called the Son of man - one like unto the Son of man; for he was made in the likeness of sinful flesh, was found in fashion as a man. I saw one like unto the Son of man, one exactly agreeing with the idea formed in the divine counsels of him that in the fulness of time was to be the Mediator between God and man. He is like unto the son of man, but is indeed the Son of God. Our Savior seems plainly to refer to this vision when he says (Joh 5:27) that the Father has therefore given him authority to execute judgment because he is the Son of man, and because he is the person whom Daniel saw in vision, to whom a kingdom and dominion were to be given. 2. He is said to come with the clouds of heaven. Some refer this to his incarnation; he descended in the clouds of heaven, came into the world unseen, as the glory of the Lord took possession of the temple in a cloud. The empires of the world were beasts that rose out of the sea; but Christ's kingdom is from above: he is the Lord from heaven. I think it is rather to be referred to his ascension; when he returned to the Father the eye of his disciples followed him, till a cloud received him out of their sight, Act 1:9. He made that cloud his chariot, wherein he rode triumphantly to the upper world. He comes swiftly, irresistibly, and comes in state, for he comes with the clouds of heaven. 3. He is here represented as having a mighty interest in Heaven. When the cloud received him out of the sight of his disciples, it is worth while to enquire (as the sons of the prophets concerning Elijah in a like case) whither it carried him, where it lodged him; and here we are told, abundantly to our satisfaction, that he came to the Ancient of days; for he ascended to his Father and our Father, to his God and our God (Joh 20:17); from him he came forth, and to him he returns, to be glorified with him, and to sit down at his right hand. It was with a great deal of pleasure that he said, Now I go to him that sent me. But was he welcome? Yes, not doubt, he was, for they brought him near before him; he was introduced into his Father's presence, with the attendance and adorations of all the angels of God, Heb 1:6. God caused him to draw near and approach to him, as an advocate and undertaker for us (Jer 30:21), that we through him might be made nigh. By this solemn near approach which he made to the Ancient of days it appears that the Father accepted the sacrifice he offered, and the satisfaction he made, and was entirely well pleased with all he had done. He was brought near, as our high priest, who for us enters within the veil, and as our forerunner, 4. He is here represented as having a mighty influence upon this earth, Dan 7:14. When he went to be glorified with his Father he had a power given him over all flesh, Joh 17:2, Joh 17:5. With the prospect of this Daniel and his friends are here comforted, that not only the dominion of the church's enemies shall be taken away (Dan 7:12), but the church's head and best friend shall have the dominion given him; to him every knee shall bow and every tongue confess. Phi 2:9, Phi 2:10. To him are given glory and a kingdom, and they are given by him who has an unquestionable right to give them, which, some think with an eye to these words, our Savior teaches us to acknowledge in the close of the Lord's prayer, For thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory. It is here foretold that the kingdom of the exalted Redeemer shall be, (1.) A universal kingdom, the only universal monarchy, whatever others have pretended to, or aimed at: All people, nations, and languages, shall fear him, and be under his jurisdiction, either as his willing subjects or as his conquered captives, to be either ruled or overruled by him. One way or other, the kingdoms of the world shall all become his kingdoms. (2.) An everlasting kingdom. His dominion shall not pass away to any successor, much less to any invader, and his kingdom is that which shall bot be destroyed. Even the gates of hell, or the infernal powers and policies, shall not prevail against it. The church shall continue militant to the end of time, and triumphant to the endless ages of eternity.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv7–24 After this I saw in the night visions, and…
After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast,.... Not in another night, as Jarchi; but in the same night, and in the same visions of it; only after he had seen the other three successively, then last of all he saw this fourth beast; and more being said of this than of the rest, shows that this was the principal thing in the vision to be observed, as being to endure until, and having a close connection with, the kingdom of the Messiah; which, arising, shall destroy it, and take place of it: this is not the Turkish empire, as Aben Ezra, and others: nor the kingdom of the Seleucidae, as Grotius, and others; to which neither the characters, nor the duration of it, agree; but the Roman empire, which succeeded the Grecian, so Gorionides (g):
dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; exceeding powerful, as the Roman empire was, and terrible to all the kingdoms of the earth; its armies, wherever they came, struck terror among the nations, and threw them into a panic, killing, wasting, robbing all they met with (h); and especially it was terrible to Christians, by their persecutions of them, as both Rome Pagan and Rome Papal have been. Rome has its name from strength with the Greeks, and from height with the Hebrews, as Jerom (i) observes:
Read full note →
it had great iron teeth; which may design its generals and emperors, such as Scipio, Pompey, Julius Caesar, and others; which crushed and devoured all that came in their way: this monarchy answers to the legs and feet of iron in Nebuchadnezzar's dream:
it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it; it devoured nations, broke kingdoms in pieces, and brought them in subjection to them; reducing them to the greatest servitude, and obliging them to pay heavy taxes and tribute:
it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it: in its original, language, laws, customs, and forms of government; it was such a monster, that no name could be given it; there was no one beast in nature to which it could be compared; it had all the ill properties of the other beasts, for craft, cruelty oppression, and tyranny; and therefore John describes this same beast as being like a leopard, having the feet of a bear and the mouth of a lion. Rev 13:2,
and it had ten horns; which are explained of ten kings or kingdoms, Dan 7:24, the same with the ten toes in Nebuchadnezzar's dream and with the ten kings that received power as kings with the beast or ten kingdoms, into which the Roman empire was divided about the time of the rise of antichrist,see Gill on Rev_17:12.
(g) (Curt. Hist.) l. 3. c. 15. p. 221. (h) Raptores Orbis, &c. Taciti Vita Agricolae, c. 30. (i) Adv. Jovinian. l. 2. fol. 32. L.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 16, 18 A fourth beast - The Roman empire.
A fourth beast - The Roman empire.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22 Verse 7. I saw - a fourth beast -…
Verse 7. I saw - a fourth beast - it had great iron teeth] This is allowed, on all hands, to be the Roman empire. It was dreadful, terrible, and exceeding strong: it devoured, and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue, that is, the remains of the former kingdoms, with its feet. It reduced Macedon into a Roman province about one hundred and sixty-eight years before Christ; the kingdom of Perpamos about one hundred and thirty-three years; Syria about sixty-five; and Egypt about thirty years before Christ. And, besides the remains of the Macedonian empire, it subdued many other provinces and kingdoms; so that it might, by a very usual figure, be said to devour the whole earth, to tread it down, and break it to pieces; and became in effect, what the Roman writers delight to call it, the empire of the whole world.
It (the fourth beast) was diverse from all the beasts that were before it] Not only in its republican form of government, but also in power and greatness, extent of dominion, and length of duration.
Read full note →
It had ten horns] The ten kingdoms into which the Roman empire was afterwards divided. Calmet says, ten Syrian kings: and he finds them thus: -
1. Seleucus Nicator.
2. Antiochus Soter.
3. Antiochus Theos.
4. Antiochus Callinicus.
5. Seleucus Ceraunus.
6. Antiochus the Great.
7. Seleucus, surnamed Philopater, brother of Antiochus Epiphanes.
8. Laomedon of Mitylene, to whom Syria and Phoenicia had been intrusted.
9. Antigone. And,
10. His son Demetrius, who possessed those provinces, with the title of kings.
This is too much like forced work. There are different opinions concerning these ten kings; or rather which they were that constituted this division of the Roman empire. They are reckoned thus: -
1. The Roman senate.
2. The Greeks, in Ravenna.
3. The Lombards in Lombardy.
4. The Huns in Hungary.
5. The Alemans, in Germany.
6. The Franks in France.
7. The Burgundians in Burgundy..
8. The Saracens in Africa, and a part of Spain.
9. The Goths, in other parts of Spain.
10. And the Saxons, in Britain.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 19, 23 Dan 7:7. Behold a fourth beast — This fourth…
Dan 7:7. Behold a fourth beast — This fourth kingdom can be no other than the Roman empire, which answers this emphatical description better than any of the former kingdoms. Dreadful, and terrible, and strong exceedingly — And therefore compared to iron, Dan 2:40. It devoured and brake in pieces — It spread its arms and its terrors to a much greater extent than any of the preceding powers, and entirely subdued all the remains of the former kingdoms, and all the nations that had been subject to them. It reduced Macedon into a Roman province about one hundred and sixty-eight years, the kingdom of Pergamus about one hundred and thirty-three years, Syria about sixty-five years, and Egypt about thirty years, before Christ. And besides the remains of the Macedonian empire, it subdued many other provinces and kingdoms; so that it might, by a very usual figure, be said to devour the whole earth, to tread it down and break it in pieces; and become, in a manner, what the Roman writers delighted to call it, “The empire of the whole world.” The words of Dionysius Halicarnassus are very apposite to this subject. “The city of Rome,” says he, “ruleth over all the earth as far as it is inhabited, and commands all the sea, not only that within the Pillars of Hercules, but also the ocean, as far as it is navigable; having first and alone, of all the celebrated kingdoms, made the east and west the bounds of its empire, and its dominion hath continued longer than that of any other city or kingdom.” And it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it — This is intimated by its having no name, being more cruel and horrid than any sort of beast whatever; and the Roman power was so multiform, that it could not be pointed out by any one species of resemblance. And it was different from all kingdoms in its republican form of government, its greatness, length of duration, and extent of dominion. But its chief distinction consisted in its having ten horns, which we find at Dan 7:24 are ten kings or kingdoms: see also Rev 17:12. And these answer to the ten toes of the image, Dan 2:42. The empire continued in its greatness fill the reign of Theodosius the Great, and soon afterward the partition happened, and the broken form remained, for the ten kingdoms were to be no more united, till the Ancient of days should come.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 After this I saw in the night visions -…
After this I saw in the night visions - The other beasts were seen also in a dream Dan 7:1, and this probably in the same night, though as a subsequent part of the dream, for the whole vision evidently passed before the prophet in a single dream. The succession, or the fact that he saw one after the other, indicates a sucession in the kingdoms. They were not to be at the same time upon the earth, but one was to arise after another in the order here indicated, though they were in some respects to occupy the same territory. The singular character of the beast that now appears; the number of the horns; the springing up of a new horn; the might and terror of the beast, and the long duration of its dominion upon the earth, attracted and fixed the attention of Daniel, led him into a more minute description of the appearance of the animal, and induced him particularly to ask an explanation of the angel of the meaning of this part of the vision, Dan 7:19.
And, behold, a fourth beast - This beast had peculiar characteristics, all of which were regarded as symbolic, and all of which demand explanation in order that we may have a just view of the nature and design of the symbol.
Read full note →
As in reference to the three former beasts, so also in regard to this, it will be proper to explain first the significance of the different parts of the symbol, and then in the exposition (Dan 7:19, following) to inquire into the application. The particulars of this symbol are more numerous, more striking, and more important than in either of the previous ones. These particulars are the following Dan 7:7-11 :
(a) The animal itself Dan 5:7 : “a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly.” The form or nature of the beast is not given as in the preceding cases - the lion, the bear, and the leopard - but it is left for the imagination to fill up. It was a beast more terrific in its appearance than either of the others, and was evidently a monster such as could not be designated by a single name. The terms which are used here in describing the beast - “dreadful, terrible, exceedingly strong,” are nearly synonymous, and are heaped together in order to give an impressive view of the terror inspired by the beast. There can be no doubt as to the general meaning of this, for it is explained Dan 7:23 as denoting a kingdom that “should devour the whole earth, and tread it down, and break it in pieces.” As a symbol, it would denote some power much more fearful and much more to be dreaded; having a wider dominion; and more stern, more oppressive in its character, more severe in its exactions, and more entirely destroying the liberty of others; advancing more by power and terror, and less by art and cunning, than either. This characteristic is manifest throughout the symbol.
(b) The teeth Dan 7:7 : “and it had great iron teeth.” Not only teeth or tusks, such as other animals may have, but teeth made of iron. This is characteristic of a monster, and shows that there was to be something very peculiar in the dominion that was here symbolized. The teeth are of use to eat or devour; and the symbol here is that of devouring or rending - as a fierce monster with such teeth might be supposed to rend or devour all that was before it. This, too, would denote a nation exceedingly fierce; a nation of savage ferocity; a nation that would be signally formidable to all others. For illustration, compare Jer 15:12; Mic 4:13. As explained in Dan 7:23, it is said that the kingdom denoted by this would “devour the whole earth.” Teeth - great teeth, are often used as the symbols of cruelty, or of a devouring enemy. Thus in Pro 30:14 : “There is a generation whose teeth are as swords, and their jaw teeth are as knives, to devour the poor from off the earth, and the needy from among men.” So David uses the word to denote the cruelty of tyrants: Psa 3:7, “Thou hast broken the teeth of the ungodly;” Psa 57:4, “whose teeth are spears and arrows;” Psa 58:6, “break their teeth in their mouth; break out the great teeth of the young lions.”
(c) The stamping with the feet Dan 7:7 : “it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it.” That is, like a fierce monster, whatever it could not devour it stamped down and crushed in the earth. This indicates a disposition or purpose to destroy, for the sake of destroying, or where no other purpose could be gained. It denotes rage, wrath, a determination to crush all in its way, to have universal dominion; and would be applicable to a nation that subdued and crushed others for the mere sake of doing it, or because it was unwilling that any other should exist and enjoy liberty - even where itself could not hope for any advantage.
(d) The fact that it was different from all that went before it Dan 7:7 : “and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it.” The prophet does not specify particularly in what respects it was different, for he does not attempt to give its appearance. It was not a lion, a bear, or a leopard, but he does not say precisely what it was. Probably it was such a monster that there were no animals with which it could be compared. He states some circumstances, however, in which it was different - as in regard to the ten horns, the little horn, the iron teeth, etc., but still the imagination is left to fill up the picture in general. The meaning of this must be, that the fourth kingdom, represented by this beast, would be materially different from those which preceded it, and we must look for the fulfillment in some features that would characterize it by which it would be unlike the others. There must be something marked in the difference - something that would be more than the common difference between nations.
(e) The ten horns Dan 7:7 : “and it had ten horns.” That is, the prophet saw on it ten horns as characterizing the beast. The horn is a symbol of power, and is frequently so used as an emblem or symbol in Daniel Dan 7:7-8, Dan 7:20, Dan 7:24; Dan 8:3-9, Dan 8:20-22 and Revelation Rev 5:6; Rev 13:1, Rev 13:11; Rev 17:3, Rev 17:12, Rev 17:16. It is used as a symbol because the great strength of horned animals is found there. Thus in Amo 6:13, it is said:
“Ye that rejoice in a thing of nought,
That say, Have we not taken dominion to ourselves By our own strength?”
(Heb. horns.)
So in Deu 33:17 :
“His beauty shall be that of a young bull,
And his horns shall be the horns of a rhinoceros:
With these he shall push the people to the extremities of the land:
Such are the ten thousands of Ephraim,
Such the thousands of Manasseh.”
- Wemyss.
So in 1Ki 22:11, we find horns used in a symbolic action on the part of the false prophet Zedekiah. “He made him horns of iron, and said, Thus saith Jehovah, With these shalt thou push the Syrians, until thou have consumed them.” In Zec 1:18, the four horns that are seen by the prophet are said to be the four great powers which had scattered and wasted the Jews. Compare Wemyss on the Symbolic Language of Scripture, art. “Horns.” There can be no doubt as to the meaning of the symbol here, for it is explained in a subsequent part of the chapter Dan 7:24, “the ten horns are the ten kings that shall arise.” It would seem also, from that explanation, that they were to be ten kings that would “arise” or spring out of that kingdom at some period of its history. “And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise;” that is, not that the kingdom itself would spring out of ten others that would be amalgamated or consolidated into one, but that out of that one kingdom there would spring up ten that would exercise dominion, or in which the power of the one kingdom would be ultimately lodged. Though Daniel appears to have seen these horns as pertaining to the beast when he first saw him, yet the subsequent explanation is, that these horns were emblems of the manner in which the power of that one kingdom would be finally exerted; or that ten kings or dynasties would spring out of it. We are, then, naturally to look for the fulfillment of this in some one great kingdom of huge power that would crush the nations, and from which, while the same general characteristic would remain, there would spring up ten kings, or dynasties, or kingdoms, in which the power would be concentrated.
(f) The springing up of the little horn Dan 7:8 : “I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn.” There are several points to be noticed in regard to this:
(1) The fact that he “considered the horns;” that is, he looked on them until another sprang up among them. This implies that when he first saw the monster, it had no such horn, and that the horn sprang up a considerable time after he first saw it - intimating that it would occur, perhaps, far on in the history of the kingdom that was symbolized. It is implied that it was not an event which would soon occur.
(2) It sprang up “among” the others (ביניהן bēynēyhēn) - starting from the same source, and pertaining to the same animal, and therefore a development or putting forth of the same power. The language used here does not designate, with any degree of certainty, the precise place which it occupied, but it would seem that the others stood close together, and that this sprang out of the center, or from the very midst of them - implying that the new dominion symbolized would not be a foreign dominion, but one that would spring out of the kingdom itself, or that would seem to grow up in the kingdom.
(3) It was a little horn; that is, it was small at first, though subsequently it grew so as to be emblematic of great power. This would denote that the power symbolized would be small at first - springing up gradually. The fulfillment of this would be found, neither in conquest nor in revolution, nor in a change of dynasty, nor in a sudden change of a constitution, but in some power that had an obscure origin, and that was feeble and small at the beginning, yet gradually increasing, until, by its own growth, it put aside a portion of the power before exercised and occupied its place. We should naturally look for the fulfillment of this in the increase of some power within the state that had a humble origin, and that slowly developed itself until it absorbed a considerable portion of the authority that essentially resided in the kingdom represented by the monster.
(4) In the growth of that “horn,” three of the others were plucked up by the roots. The proper meaning of the word used to express this (אתעקרו 'ethe‛ăqârâv) is, that they were rooted out - as a tree is overturned by the roots, or the roots are turned out from the earth. The process by which this was done seems to have been by growth. The gradual increase of the horn so crowded on the others that a portion of them was forced out, and fell. What is fairly indicated by this was not any act of violence, or any sudden convulsion or revolution, but such a gradual growth of power that a portion of the original power was removed, and this new power occupied its place. There was no revolution, properly so-called; no change of the whole dynasty, for a large portion of the horns remained, but the gradual rise of a new power that would wield a portion of that formerly wielded by others, and that would now wield the power in its place. The number three would either indicate that three parts out of the ten were absorbed in this way, or that a considerable, though an indefinite portion, was thus absorbed.
(5) The eyes: “and behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man.” Eyes denote intelligence, as we see objects by their aid. The rims of the wheels in Ezekiel’s vision were full of eyes Eze 1:18, as symbolic of intelligence. This would denote that the power here referred to would be remarkably sagacious. We should naturally look for the fulfillment of this in a power that laid its plans wisely and intelligently; that had large and clear views of policy; that was shrewd and far-seeing in its counsels and purposes; that was skilled in diplomacy; or, that was eminent for statesman-like plans. This part of the symbol, if it stood alone, would find its fulfillment in any wise and shrewd administration; as it stands here, surrounded by others, it would seem that this, as contrasted with them, was characteristically shrewd and far-seeing in its policy. Lengerke, following Jerome, supposes that this means that the object referred to would be a man, “as the eyes of men are keener and sharper than those of other animals.” But the more correct interpretation is that above referred to - that it denotes intelligence, shrewdness, sagacity.
(6) The mouth: “and a mouth speaking great things.” A mouth indicating pride and arrogance. This is explained in Dan 7:25, as meaning that he to whom it refers would “speak great words against the Most High;” that is, would be guilty of blasphemy. There would be such arrogance, and such claims set up, and such a spirit evinced, that it would be in fact a speaking against God. We naturally look for the fulfillment of this to some haughty and blaspheming power; some power that would really blaspheme religion, and that would be opposed to its progress and prosperity in the world. The Septuagint, in the Codex Chisianus, adds here, “and shall make war against the saints;” but these words are not found in the original Chaldee. They accord, however, well with the explanation in Dan 7:25. What has been here considered embraces all that pertains properly to this symbol - the symbol of the fourth beast - except the fact stated in Dan 7:11, that the beast was slain, and that his body was given to the burning flame. The inquiry as to the fulfillment will be appropriate when we come to consider the explanation given at the request of Daniel, by the angel, in Dan 7:19-25.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, 21, 23, 24 Unlike. It is not named: but shews the incomparable…
Unlike. It is not named: but shews the incomparable power of the Romans, governed by kings, consuls, tribunes, dictators, emperors, at different times. (Worthington) --- This in the opinion generally received, which we shall explain. Yet many think that the kingdoms of Syria and Egypt are designated, as Chap. ii. 40. St. Jerome acknowledged that what is understood of antichrist, had been partly verified in Epiphanes, his figure. The beast was to be slain before the coming of the Son of man. (verses 11, 26.) It would persecute for three years and a half; but God would grant victory to his saints, as he did to the Machabees. Yet they only exhibited a faint idea of what has been done by the Church. The same subject is treated, Chap. xi. Many things caused the dominion of the successors of Alexander to be unlike that of others. It was never united, and was very destructive to the Jews. (Calmet) --- Horns. That is, ten kingdoms, (as Apocalypse xvii. 12.) among which the empire of the fourth beast shall be parcelled: or ten kings of the number of the successors of Alexander, as figures of such as shall be about the time of antichrist. (Challoner) --- Epiphanes was the eighth king, and Laomedon, Antigonus, and Demetrius, had been governors of Syria before. Most understand this of antichrist, whom Epiphanes foreshewed. Others think that it points out Vespasian, the tenth successor of Cæsar, who made war on the Jews. The same prediction may regard different events, as the abomination (Chap. ix.) may allude to the profanations committed by Epiphanes, by the Romans at the last siege, and by antichrist. Others apply this to the Turkish empire, which may be paving the way for the great antagonist of Christ. (Calmet) Dioclesian and Julian may also be meant, as well as other forerunners of the man of sin. (Haydock) --- He shall overcome many, but his fury shall continue but a short time. (ver. 25.) (Worthington)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24 As Daniel lived under the kingdom of the first…
As Daniel lived under the kingdom of the first beast, and therefore needed not to describe it, and as the second and third are described fully in the second part of the book, the chief emphasis falls on the fourth. Also prophecy most dwells on the end, which is the consummation of the preceding series of events. It is in the fourth that the world power manifests fully its God-opposing nature. Whereas the three former kingdoms were designated respectively, as a lion, bear, and leopard, no particular beast is specified as the image of the fourth; for Rome is so terrible as to be not describable by any one, but combines in itself all that we can imagine inexpressibly fierce in all beasts. Hence thrice (Dan 7:7, Dan 7:19, Dan 7:23) it is repeated, that the fourth was "diverse from all" the others. The formula of introduction, "I saw in the night visions," occurs here, as at Dan 7:2, and again at Dan 7:13, thus dividing the whole vision into three parts--the first embracing the three kingdoms, the second the fourth and its overthrow, the third Messiah's kingdom. The first three together take up a few centuries; the fourth, thousands of years. The whole lower half of the image in the second chapter is given to it. And whereas the other kingdoms consist of only one material, this consists of two, iron and clay (on which much stress is laid, Dan 2:41-43); the "iron teeth" here allude to one material in the fourth kingdom of the image.
ten horns--It is with the crisis, rather than the course, of the fourth kingdom that this seventh chapter is mainly concerned. The ten kings (Dan 7:24, the "horns" representing power), that is, kingdoms, into which Rome was divided on its incorporation with the Germanic and Slavonic tribes, and again at the Reformation, are thought by many to be here intended. But the variation of the list of the ten, and their ignoring the eastern half of the empire altogether, and the existence of the Papacy before the breaking up of even the Western empire, instead of being the "little horn" springing up after the other ten, are against this view. The Western Roman empire continued till A.D. 731, and the Eastern, till A.D. 1453. The ten kingdoms, therefore, prefigured by the ten "toes" (Dan 2:41; compare Rev 13:1; Rev 17:12), are the ten kingdoms into which Rome shall be found finally divided when Antichrist shall appear [TREGELLES]. These, probably, are prefigured by the number ten being the prevalent one at the chief turning points of Roman history.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 19, 23, 24 7. Modern expositors are almost unanimous in explaining this…
7. Modern expositors are almost unanimous in explaining this as referring either to the Syriac-Egyptian kingdom, which filled the political horizon around the Mediterranean after the death of Alexander and his immediate successors (see Dan_2:39; Dan_8:20), or to these two successive dominions of Alexander and the Syrian kings regarded as a unity. We have already explained why we adhere to the former view and why the older opinion, that this fourth empire was the Roman, can no longer be maintained (Dan_2:39). These verses, as Prince acknowledges, do not fitly describe the civilizing conquests of Alexander, but, as even Bevan sees, are “singularly inappropriate” when applied to his victories. They do, however, express precisely the Hebrew idea of the Seleucidae; and it is very suggestive that even the scholars who make Alexander the head of this empire, as Nebuchadnezzar was of the Babylonian, do not attempt to interpret these verses as actually referring to Alexander and his immediate successors, but acknowledge that the author of Daniel was really thinking of those Syrian kings who reigned several centuries after Alexander.
Since secular historians without theological bias have seen that the empire founded by Alexander came to an end with the death of Perdiccas (321 B.C.), there is no reason, historically, why the author of Daniel may not be allowed to be consistent with himself when he describes the chief activity of this fourth beast as occurring not in Alexander’s era (fourth century B.C.) but in the era of Seleucus and Antiochus Epiphanes. (See particularly chap. 11.) The argument which is made so much of by opponents of this view, that the Seleucid beast-empire was not “diverse” from all that had preceded it, is easily answered by the simple statement of the acknowledged fact that from the Jewish standpoint it was exceedingly different from all that had preceded. To the Jews no rulers since the Pharaohs had seemed so “exceeding dreadful” (Dan_7:19); whose iron teeth and brazen nails were so “exceedingly strong” to devour the Hebrew patriots, and its mighty brutish feet to stamp them into the dust. (See Daniel 11) To seek this “diversity” from all other kingdoms in some difference in its origin, or its form of government, or its constitution, or in the conquering kings’ unwillingness “to leave the subjugated people in their former barbarism,” is to strangely miss the point. Gentile history was important to the Hebrew prophet only as it touched the Hebrew nation, and the fourth Gentile kingdom was “diverse” from the others because it was more cruel and brutal in its persecution of the “saints of the Most High” (Dan_7:25). The ten horns do not symbolize that this empire was stronger than any which had preceded it. The horns represent ten kings (Dan_7:24).
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv7–24 7. dreadful and terrible] The same two words occur…
7. dreadful and terrible] The same two words occur in combination in the Targ. of Hab_1:7, ‘terrible and dreadful are they.’ The rendering of the second word in R.V., powerful, follows a slightly different reading (’emtânî for ’êmtânî), found in some editions, but less well attested and less probable (it would be a ἅπαξ εἰρημένον in Aram., and explicable only from the Arabic).
and stamped the residue with the feet of it] in wanton destructiveness and ferocity.
Read full note →
and it was diverse, &c.] Each of the beasts was ‘diverse’ from the others (Dan_7:3); but the terrible appearance of this differentiated it materially from the other three, and placed it in a class by itself. The fourth beast has, moreover, no name; for no one creature, or even combination of creatures (as the lion with vulture’s wings in Dan_7:4), could adequately represent it; only words expressive of terribleness, ferocity, and might are accumulated for the purpose of characterizing it. The empire meant (if the two preceding ones are explained correctly) will be that of Alexander the Great: comp. Dan_8:5; Dan_8:21, Dan_11:3. Cf. the description of the fourth kingdom in Dan_2:40, as ‘strong as iron,’ and ‘breaking in pieces and bruising.’
and it had ten horns] A horn is commonly in the O.T. the figure of strength to attack and repel (e.g. Deu_33:17; Mic_4:13); but in the imagery of Daniel’s visions it represents either a king (see Dan_7:24; and cp. Dan_8:5; Dan_8:8 a, 9, 21), or a dynasty of kings (Dan_8:3; Dan_8:6-8 b, 20, 22), rising up in, or out of, the empire symbolized by the creature to which the horn belongs. Here the reference is apparently to the ten successors of Alexander on the throne of Antioch (see more fully the Additional Note, p. 101). Cf. the ‘ten toes of the feet’ in the corresponding part of ch. 2 (Dan_2:41-42).
7, 8. The fourth beast.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23 (7) A fourth beast.—This is so different from the…
(7) A fourth beast.—This is so different from the preceding three, and so terrible in appearance, that Daniel can hardly find words to describe it. The distinguishing feature of it is the power which it possesses of breaking and stamping out all that it meets. In this way it corresponds to “iron that breaketh in pieces, and subdueth all things.” (Comp. Dan_2:40.) The description of the destructive might of this beast is heightened by the mention of “iron teeth” and “brazen claws.” It should be noticed that the horns imply strength, while the ten horns correspond to the ten toes of the image.
The residue—i.e., what it did not destroy with its teeth it trampled upon and annihilated with its feet.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 19, 23 After this I saw in the night visions, and…
After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. The version of the LXX differs considerably, though not essentially, "After these things I beheld in a night vision a fourth terrible beast, and the fear of it excelled in strength; it had great iron teeth, it devoured and pounded down; it trode round about with its feet; it differed from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns, and many counsels were in its horns." The sense of this does not really differ, save in the last clause, which seems to belong to the next verse. Theodotion agrees with the Massoretic text. The Peshitta differs only by having" after these things," following the LXX, instead of "after this." The identification of the empire intended by this beast has been the crux of interpreters. Practically all ancient authorities Josephus, and the author of the Apocalypse of Baruch being among the number maintain the Roman Empire to be meant. On the other hand, a very large number of modern critics, not merely of the exclusively critical school, have held that it refers either to the Greek Empire as a whole, or to the Seleucid portion of it. As we shall discuss this subject in a separate excursus, we shall at present look at the principles to be adopted in dealing with such a question. The important point is the numerical note of this "beast." It is "ten the same it may be remarked, as in the feet of the image of Nebuchadnezzar"s dream. When we turn from the Apocalypse of the Old Testament to the Apocalypse of the New, we find "ten" the note of Rome. Even though we should put this to the one side, as merely the opinion of an apostle, and therefore not to be considered at all in comparison with that of Hitzig or Von Lengerke, yet he was writing little more than a couple of centuries from the time when, according to critics, Daniel was written; moreover, he was in the direct line of apocalyptic tradition. The Apocalypse of Baruch, written in all probability B.C. 60, has the same view, and it is separated by little more than a century from the time of the Maccabees. The Fourth Book of Esdras, written about A.D. 80, has the same view. All three books imply that it is the universally received opinion. This view is really the only one that fairly meets the case. The view which separates the Seleucid Empire from that of Alexander may be laid aside, although the first three empires are correctly interpreted, because it is directly controverted by the statement that this fourth empire is to be diverse from all that had gone before. The empire of the Seleucids was in no sense diverse from that of Alexander. This fourth empire was to be stronger than all that had gone before. The Seleucid Empire was notoriously and obviously less powerful than the empire of Alexander had been, and was merely a match for the empire of the Ptolemies. Further, the next chapter shows that the writer of Daniel regarded the empire of the Diadochi as really a continuation of that of Alexander the Great. The other view rests on a division between the Median and the Persian empires, which is contradicted by any fair interpretation of this book. The next chapter shows clearly that the writer regarded the Medo-Persian power as one, but as having two dominant races. The" great iron teeth" of the beast have a reference to the iron legs of the dream-image which appeared to Nebuchadnezzar. This beast "is diverse from all the beasts that were before it." In all the previous empires, the constitution was avowedly monarchical. With the Roman, the republican constitution appeared, and even under the emperors the forms of that constitution were preserved. In this sense it was diverse from all the preceding empires. Mr. Bevan thinks "the actrocious massacres at Tyro and elsewhere, by which Alexander en-deavoured to strike terror into the conquered races," is symbolized by the monster "devouring, crushing," etc. Mr. Bevan must never have read the accounts of the conquests of Asshur-bani-pal. He seems to have forgotten the treatment meted out to Samos and Miletus by the Persians.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv8, 9, 13, 18, 23 Another little horn.
Dan_7:8
Another little horn.
Read full note →
The Little Horn is Antichrist
1. By the ruin or destruction of this little horn, the fourth beast, or human kingdom is said utterly and finally to fall (v.11). Therefore, it cannot represent Mahomet.
2. The destroying of the beast and little horn is described in such forms as are in the book of Revelation, interpreted of Antichrist. (Rev_19:20; Rev_20:10-11.)
3. This little horn is conjoined with the ten horns (v. 7,8, 20, 24), accordingly as Antichrist is conjoined with them. (Rev_13:1-18; Rev_17:1-18.)
4. The characters attributed to him are the same which are attributed to Antichrist.
(1) He shall speak great things against the Most High.
(2) He advanceth himself above the civil magistrate.
(3) He changeth the laws and times.
(4) He maketh war with the saints, and prevaileth against them. (Thomas Parker.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On vv8, 9, 11, 13, 18, 19, 22 SECT. XXIV.—THE LITTLE HORN (Chap. Dan_7:8; Dan_7:19-25)
HOMILETICS
SECT. XXIV.—THE LITTLE HORN (Chap. Dan_7:8; Dan_7:19-25)
Read full note →
We now come to that part of Daniel’s vision which especially distinguishes it from Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. The king only saw the feet of the image divided into ten toes: Daniel not only sees ten horns proceeding from the head of the fourth beast, corresponding with these ten toes, but another horn additional to these, which, though appearing as a “little horn,” engaged the special attention of the prophet, and constitutes the leading object in the vision. The character of the kingdoms of the world was to be concentrated in that horn or the power represented by it, and it was from it that the Church of God was mainly to suffer [165]. As a “horn,” it was to be a power like the rest; that term, expressive of the powerful weapon of many animals, being figuratively employed in the Scripture to denote power or strength, and so a kingdom or a sovereignty. See Deu_33:17; Psa_18:2; Luk_1:69. In relation to the “little horn” we have to notice—
[165] “It is in the fearful shape of the last beast that the world-power will fully manifest that its whole nature is opposed to God. But as the interest which attaches to the four monarchies is led rapidly over the first three to centre in the last, so, for the same reason, in considering the last we are led to the final shape.… The description introduces these horns merely to show how an eleventh has sprung up in their midst, a king in whom the full haughty hatred and rebellion against God, His people, and His service, finds its representative.… The essential nature of the kingdoms of the world appears concentrated in the fourth kingdom; the nature of the fourth kingdom, in like manner, in its last worldly ruler. Thus it is only at the end that the peculiar character of the world-power, “the mystery of iniquity,” is unveiled, and we recognise in the eleventh horn no other than he whom Paul calls “the Man of Sin” and “the Son of Perdition” (2 Thessalonians 2.) Here, for the first time in the development of revelation, the idea of Antichrist is clearly unfolded; because here, for the first time, the entire course of the development of the godless and God-opposing world is clearly surveyed down to the very end.”—Auberlen. So Dr. Pusey, who also sees in the Little Horn mainly an Antichrist yet to come.” “Why should there not be under the fourth empire an antagonism to the true God, concentrated in and directed by one individual, as it was in and by Antiochus in the third? Human nature repeats itself. What man has done, man will do. We Christians look for an Antichrist yet to come. Our Lord forewarned of him and his deceivableness. St. Paul describes such an one as Daniel speaks of.” We must not, however, overlook the Antichrist of the past and the present, while even as Protestants we may also acknowledge an Antichrist yet to come.
I. Its rise. It is said to rise among the other ten horns, and so to be contemporaneous with them; and also after or behind them, and so in the time of its appearance posterior to the rest, as well as gradual in its growth and for a time unobserved. Before it, three of the ten were “plucked up by the roots and fell,” or, as it is interpreted by the angel, it subdued three out of the ten kings or kingdoms, and so made room for itself by occupying their place (Dan_7:8; Dan_7:10; Dan_7:24). The other horns obtained their place as kingdoms out of the body of the fourth beast or Roman empire; this one was to obtain its place out of that beast only indirectly, by gaining it out of the others.
II. Its character and description.
(1.) A “little” horn; small in comparison with the rest, especially in its commencement, and humble, perhaps, in its profession.
(2.) “Diverse from the rest;” its diversity consisting in this, that it had “eyes” in it, like the eyes of a “man,” and a “mouth speaking great things,”—the eyes and the mouth sufficiently indicating a human being as represented by it [166], and a power of a peculiar character; the eyes of a man, not of a god; lamb-like, though speaking as a dragon (Rev_13:11.)
(3.) The mouth uttered “great words against the Most High;” hence proud, arrogant, and blasphemous; while from the eyes was a “look more stout than his fellows,” also indicative of pride and haughtiness above that of the other powers, and an overbearing demeanour in respect to them.
(4.) He was to “make war with the saints of the Most High, to wear them out, and prevail against them;” a persecuting power, and one whose persecutions should be persevering and successful, against such as adhered to a holy life and the worship of God according to His Word.
(5.) He was to “think to change times and laws;” lofty in his pretensions, as superior to laws both human and divine, and affecting a power which is the prerogative of God (chap. Dan_2:21).
5. The saints were to be “given into his hand” for a definite period, prophetically and enigmatically described as a “a time, times, and the dividing of a time;” his power over the saints or true worshippers of God to be absolute for a time, but that time a limited one. “To form a well-grounded judgment regarding the appearance of this last enemy,” observes Keil, “we must compare the description given of him here with the apocalyptic description of the same enemy under the image of the beast out of the sea or out of the abyss” (Rev_13:1-8; Rev_17:7-13); and we may add, with the description of the “Man of Sin” given by the apostle (2Th_2:4, &c.), with an obvious allusion to the passage before us.
[166] “Eyes like the eyes of man.” “Eyes and seeing with eyes are the symbols of insight, circumspection, and prudence. The eyes of a man, not merely to indicate that the horn signified a man, which was already distinctly enough shown by the fact of eyes, &c., being attributed to it, nor yet to distinguish it from a beast; but in opposition to a higher celestial being, for whom it might, from the terribleness of its rule and government, be mistaken.”—Keil. Others have viewed the expression as indicative of the assumed blandness that accompanied papal arrogance, and the sharp look-out kept by the popes on their own and their families’ interests, as well as those of the Church.
III. Its identification. This power intended to be identified as truly as the four beasts themselves. The minute and varied description obviously given with this view. This description, including both its rise and character, ought apparently to leave no room for doubt as to what is intended by it, and no difficulty in identifying it when the power indicated should appear. The question is, has such a power already appeared, or are we still to look for it? The latter unlikely, as the fourth beast, from which it springs, has confessedly appeared two thousand years ago, and the ten kingdoms, among and behind which it was to rise, have probably been in existence about fourteen centuries. Has, then, any power appeared during that period to which the description is at all applicable, and to which it has been applied? There is a well-known power to which the description has appeared so applicable, that for more than three hundred years the description has been actually and unhesitatingly applied to it by almost all who have studied this passage, with the exception, of course, of those who are in any way connected with the power itself; although it is probable that the horn may not even yet have fully developed itself [167]. That power is the Papacy, with the Bishop of Rome as its head and representative [168]; for nearly thirteen centuries a temporal power, like the other horns, though now no longer such [169]; but so diverse from them as to be at the same time a spiritual power, while the rest were only secular ones. The identity has appeared—
[167] Jerome and the fathers, as well as De Lyra, Hugo, and Roman Catholic writers generally, interpret the little horn of the Antichrist, who should come in the end of the world, after the Roman empire is destroyed. Some of the Reformers, as Melanchthon and Osiander, understood it of the Turkish empire. Calvin thinks that historically this prophecy of the Little Horn was fulfilled before the coming of the Messiah into the world, in the person of Julius Cæsar, Augustus, and the other emperors; but that it may, by analogy, be applied, as it was by some, to the Pope or to the Turks; “and these applications,” he says, “by way of analogy I mislike not.” Œcolampadius understood it of the Pope in the West, and the Turkish empire in the East. Bullinger, and the Reformers in general, applied the prophecy entirely to the Papacy. Junius, Polanus, and Willet understood it historically of Antiochus Epiphanes, but typically of Antichrist. Dr. Lee, of Cambridge, applies it to heathen Rome and the persecuting emperors from Nero to Constantine. The Futurists, with Roman Catholic writers, understand it of an Antichrist yet to come.
[168] Dr. Rule observes that the description given of the Little Horn exactly answers to the Papacy, and regards the assumption of absolute sovereignty over the city and territory of Rome by Pope Innocent III. as the uprising of it, a sovereign pontiff over a temporal dominion, armed also with military powers. “Here,” says Muratori, in relating this event, “expired the last breath of the Augusti in Rome; and henceforth the prefects of Rome, the Senate, and the other magistrates, swore fealty to the Roman Pontiff only.” Professor Bush says, “This Little Horn is unquestionably the ecclesiastical power of the Papacy. This horn did not come till after the empire received its deadly wound by the hands of the Goths.”
[169] That the Bishop of Rome became a temporal ruler, receiving his place and rank as such among and soon after the other rulers of the kingdoms formed out of the dismembered Roman empire, every one knows. One of the most remarkable events of recent years was the entire cessation of this temporal sovereignty of the Pope, when in 1870, after the French Emperor had withdrawn his troops from Rome, Victor Emmanuel, as king of Italy, at the voice of the people, assumed the entire government of the country, leaving Pius IX. only the Vatican and its precincts for his residence; the Pope exclaiming against the act as one of wicked sacrilege and spoliation, and endeavouring to rouse all Catholic Europe to aid him in recovering the lost “patrimony of St. Peter.” The Times of the period said, “In the same year the Papacy has assumed the highest spiritual exaltation to which it could aspire, and lost the temporal sovereignty which it had held for a thousand years.”
1. In the rise of the Papacy. The Little Horn rose among, and at the same time after or behind, the other ten; while three of these were plucked up and fell before it, so that their place was occupied by it, or, as interpreted by the angel, three kingdoms, states, or powers were subdued by it [170]. It is known that it was while the Northern nations were establishing for themselves kingdoms out of the decaying Roman empire that the Bishops of Rome also became temporal rulers, and that they did so after occasioning the fall of some of those rulers, probably those of Lombardy, Ravenna, and Rome, whose territories then became their own under the name of the States of the Church [171]. A writer on prophecy remarks: “The Little Horn came up among the ten horns, of which three fell before it. This determines the appearance of the Little Horn to be not before the appearance of the ten, of which not one came into being till after the year 487 of the Christian era, until which time the Roman empire continued under its emperors, undivided into any of those ten kingdoms which arose afterwards. At that time Augustulus, the last Emperor of the West, was forced to resign; and for three hundred years the empire remained without even a nominal head.” It is in remarkable agreement with this fact that Paul speaks of the “Man of Sin” as being hindered at that time from revealing himself by something which he does not name, but which would one day be taken out of the way; that hindrance being doubtless the Roman imperial power, which for obvious reasons Paul did not think it expedient to name. The circumstance of the three horns or states being rooted up to make way for the temporal power of the Papacy seems openly declared in the “triple crown” which the Pope still continues to wear.
[170] “Before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots.” “He shall subdue three kings” (Dan_7:8; Dan_7:24). יְהַשְׁפִּיל (yehashpil), “shall overthrow, deprive of sovereignty.”—Keil. Some have understood the number three as indefinite. So Calvin and Œcolampadius, but understanding it as denoting much or many. Most have viewed it as a definite number. Jerome and others after him understood the three horns to be Egypt, Africa, and Ethiopia, which were to be subdued by Antichrist. Melanchthon thought of Egypt, Syria, and Cilicia, to be taken by the Turks; while Osiander and Pfaff understood them to be Asia, Greece, and Egypt. Bullinger, applying the prophecy to the Papacy, regarded the three horns as the Emperor Leo, or the Exarchate of Ravenna, taken by Gregory II.; Childeric, king of France, deposed by Pope Zachary; and the Lombards with the government they obtained from Leo III. Dr. Rule considers them to be the Roman Senate and people, with the so-called patrimony of St. Peter, gained a.d. 498; Apulia, otherwise called Naples, and Sicily, obtained in 1266. He observes that, simultaneously with these acquisitions, the work of persecution, foretold in the next verses, rapidly advanced. According to Mr. Birks, the three horns were the kingdom of the Heruli under Odoacer, that of the Ostrogoths under Theodoric, who at the instigation of the Pope overthrew the former, and took possession of that part of Italy forming the Exarchate of Ravenna, which again, at the Pope’s instance, was overthrown by Belisarius and Narses, lieutenants of the Emperor Justinian; the third power overthrown being that of the Lombards under Alboin and Aistulph. To obtain freedom from the threatened yoke of the Lombards, and to secure still farther the possession of a temporal dominion, the Pope made his appeal to Pepin, son of Charles Martel, as well as to Charles (Charlemagne) and Carloman, the three kings of the Franks. “Pepin and Charlemagne willingly undertook the task of uprooting the Lombard kingdom, the last enemy that stood in the way of the ambitious See.” After the surrender of Pavia, “the last obstacle was now removed, and the popes rose at length to temporal dominion, and obtained a firm and settled place among the powers and kingdoms of the Western Empire. ‘The Church’s ancient patrimony of farms and houses,’ says Gibbon, ‘was transformed by the bounty of the Carlovingians into the temporal dominion of cities and provinces; and the donation of the Exarchate was the first-fruits of the victories of Pepin.’ The ample province of the Exarchate, granted to the Papacy by the usurper Pepin, might comprise all the provinces of Italy which had obeyed the Emperor and his vicegerent; but its strict and proper limits were included in the territory of Ravenna, Bologna, and Ferrara, and its inseparable dependency was the Pentapolis.”
[171] The following are extracts from Clement’s letter, written towards the end of the first century, to allay some disturbances in the Church at Corinth in regard to the pastorate. “These things, beloved, we write not only to admonish you of your duty, but to admonish ourselves, for we are in the same race and conflict. Wherefore, let us abandon vain and empty cares, and advance to the glorious and venerable rule of our calling. Let us look to what is beautiful, and pleasing, and acceptable in the eyes of our Creator. Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ, and consider how precious to God is that blood, which, having been shed for our salvation, has offered the grace of repentance to all the world.… Christ belongs to those who conduct themselves humbly, not those who exalt themselves over His flock with pride and arrogance.… Let us attach ourselves to those to whom grace has been given by God. Let us put on concord with moderation of mind, endued with the gift of self-control. Temerity, arrogance, and audacity belong to those who are accursed of God; moderation, humility, and meekness to those who are blessed of Him.… The apostles, preaching the Word through regions and cities, proving their first-fruits in the Spirit, appointed bishops and deacons of those who believed. The apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that contentions would arise about the name of the episcopate, and on that account, being endowed with perfect foreknowledge, they appointed persons previously indicated, and left successions of ministers and officers afterwards described, that other approved men might succeed to their place and discharge their offices. Look diligently into the Scriptures. Take into your hands the epistles of the blessed Apostle Paul. Consider what he wrote to you near the very beginning of his preaching the gospel. Being certainly divinely inspired, he reminded you in an epistle concerning himself, Cephas, and Apollos, that even then there were seditions and party feelings among you.… Whosoever is zealous, pitiful, and full of love among you, let him say, ‘If any sedition, contention, or division, has arisen through me, I will depart; I will go away whithersoever you wish; I will do whatever is commanded by the people; that only the flock of Christ may live in peace with the elders (or presbyters) that have been appointed over them.’ ”
“The tempter,” says Gavazzi, “came over the Alps in the Gallic Pepin; he showed from a pinnacle of earthly power and aggrandisement the kingdoms of this world, and pledged himself to secure their homage, if, falling prostrate before God’s adversary, ‘Christ’s Vicar’ should adore him. The sacrilegious bargain was struck; the ark of the Lord was placed in the temple of Dagon; the bishops of Rome, who over and over again suffered death rather than offer incense to Pagan idols, fell into the palpable snare of Satan; and the hand that bore on its finger the brightest of sacerdotal gems in the ‘ring of the fisherman’ was outstretched, with scandalous avidity, to burn a fatal frankincense on the altar of secular ambition. A visible change fell on the Papacy. The gory crown of martyrdom was exchanged for the glittering tiara.”
Mr. Mede supposed the three “uprooted” or “depressed” horns to be, first, the Greeks, that is, the entire kingdom of Italy, which in 554 was ended by the Exarchate or dependent government of the Greek emperor, which continued for fifteen years; second, the Lombards, who possessed the country for about 200 years; and, third, the Franks, who stretched their authority into the immediate vicinity of Rome.
2. In the character of the Papacy.
(1.) The horn was a “little” one. The territory of the Papacy has always been small in comparison with that of the other powers, never exceeding the extent of an Italian province. The Pope properly and originally a humble minister of Jesus Christ, on a level with the other bishops or presiding ministers of the Churches, and possessing no territory or temporal jurisdiction whatever; so “little” that the apostle does not even salute or mention him in his Epistle to the Church at Rome. The Epistle of Clement, one of the first Bishops of Rome, if not the very first, written to the Church of Corinth, breathes the very spirit of humility [172], a humility which is affected by his successors, while each calls himself the “servant of servants” and a successor of “the fisherman.”
[172] The following are extracts from Clement’s letter, written towards the end of the first century, to allay some disturbances in the Church at Corinth in regard to the pastorate. “These things, beloved, we write not only to admonish you of your duty, but to admonish ourselves, for we are in the same race and conflict. Wherefore, let us abandon vain and empty cares, and advance to the glorious and venerable rule of our calling. Let us look to what is beautiful, and pleasing, and acceptable in the eyes of our Creator. Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ, and consider how precious to God is that blood, which, having been shed for our salvation, has offered the grace of repentance to all the world.… Christ belongs to those who conduct themselves humbly, not those who exalt themselves over His flock with pride and arrogance.… Let us attach ourselves to those to whom grace has been given by God. Let us put on concord with moderation of mind, endued with the gift of self-control. Temerity, arrogance, and audacity belong to those who are accursed of God; moderation, humility, and meekness to those who are blessed of Him.… The apostles, preaching the Word through regions and cities, proving their first-fruits in the Spirit, appointed bishops and deacons of those who believed. The apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that contentions would arise about the name of the episcopate, and on that account, being endowed with perfect foreknowledge, they appointed persons previously indicated, and left successions of ministers and officers afterwards described, that other approved men might succeed to their place and discharge their offices. Look diligently into the Scriptures. Take into your hands the epistles of the blessed Apostle Paul. Consider what he wrote to you near the very beginning of his preaching the gospel. Being certainly divinely inspired, he reminded you in an epistle concerning himself, Cephas, and Apollos, that even then there were seditions and party feelings among you.… Whosoever is zealous, pitiful, and full of love among you, let him say, ‘If any sedition, contention, or division, has arisen through me, I will depart; I will go away whithersoever you wish; I will do whatever is commanded by the people; that only the flock of Christ may live in peace with the elders (or presbyters) that have been appointed over them.’ ”
(2.) It was “diverse from the first” (Dan_7:24), having the eyes and mouth of a man. The difference of the Papacy from the other powers, as already noticed, conspicuous in this, that it was at the same time both a temporal and a spiritual power, the Pope being both a secular prince and a spiritual teacher, or, as Gibbon expresses it, “a Christian bishop invested with the prerogatives of a temporal prince.” The Pope claimed both swords, the civil and the ecclesiastical; a combination perhaps indicated in the Revelation by the two separate beasts, the one rising out of the sea and the other out of the earth (Rev_13:1-11), or in the fact that the latter had two horns like a lamb, while it spake like a dragon (Dan_7:11).
(3 ) “His look was more stout than his fellows” (Dan_7:20). It is well known what anathemas were fulminated by the Popes against all who refused to acknowledge their supremacy or submit to their authority; how kings were deposed and their kingdoms placed under interdicts which deprived them of religious ordinances, their subjects released from their allegiance, and their crown given to another. This “stout look,” and the claim of making and unmaking kings at pleasure, conspicuous in the person of Gregory VII. (A.D. 1073). “I have received,” said he, “from God the power of binding and of loosing in heaven and in earth; and by this power I forbid Henry (the Fourth, Emperor of Germany) the government of the whole realm of Germany and Italy. I also loose all Christians from the oaths they have taken to him; and I decree that no man shall obey him as king” [173]. Among the “stout words” of the Papacy are the following, spoken by the same Gregory: “The Roman Pontiff alone can be called universal. He alone has a right to use imperial ornaments. Princes are bound to kiss his feet, and his feet only. He has a right to depose emperors. No book can be called canonical without his authority. His sentence can be annulled by none, but he may annul the decrees of all.” It is also to be remembered that the popes claim infallibility.
[173] These were not empty words. Henry, driven to despair, in a winter of unusual severity, crossed the Alps with the determination of seeking the Pope’s forgiveness and reconciliation. Gregory was at Canossa, a fortress near Reggio. The Emperor was admitted without hit guards into an outer courtof the castle, where he was kept standing for three successive days, from morning to evening, in a woollen shirt, and with bare feet, while Gregory, shut up with the Countess, refused to admit him into his presence. On the fourth day he obtained absolution, but only on condition that he appeared on a certain day to receive the Pope’s decision as to whether or not he should be restored to his kingdom, till which time he was not to assume the insignia of royalty. It was this same Pope who endeavoured to compel William the Conqueror to do homage for the crown of England, and who menaced Philip I. of France with deposition. The language and bearing of Adrian IV., in 1155, to the Emperor Frederick was of a similar character. The Pope insisted on the Emperor becoming his equerry and holding his stirrup while he mounted. “To place your name before ours,” said he to the Emperor, “is arrogance, is insolence; and to cause bishops to render homage to you, those whom the Scripture calls gods, sons of the Most High, is to want that faith which you have sworn to St. Peter and to us. Hasten then to amend, lest that, in taking to yourself what does not belong to you, you lose the crown with which we have gratified you.”
(4.) “It had eyes like the eyes of man” (Dan_7:8). The very title of bishop, which is simply “overseer,” as in Act_20:28 and 1Pe_5:3, is in perfect agreement with this mark of the horn. The popes, as bishops or overseers, being spiritual teachers, are supposed to be endowed with wisdom and knowledge to qualify them for their office, of which the eyes of a man are a well-known symbol [174].
[174] See note (2).
(5.) The horn had also “a mouth speaking great things,” even “great words against the Most High.” The first of these expressions indicates pride and arrogance, the latter blasphemy. The Papal bulls leave little room for doubt as to the applicability of the former to the Papacy. “The tribunals of kings,” say they, “are subject to the sacerdotal power.” “Since the Holy Roman Church, over which Christ has willed that we preside, is set for a mirror and example, whatever it has decreed, whatever it now ordains, must be perpetually and irrefragably observed by all men.” The words spoken against or (as the word is also rendered) as the Most High [175] are such as tend to set God aside. These have not been wanting in the lips of the Papacy. “The Roman Pontiff,” says Pope Stephen, “is to judge all men, and to be judged by no man.” “The Pope is styled God,” says Pope Nicholas, “by the pious prince; and it is manifest that God cannot be judged by man.” This mark may be truly regarded as made good, as Bishop Newton observes, by the popes “setting up themselves against all laws human and divine, arrogating to themselves godlike attributes and titles, and exacting obedience to their ordinances and decrees.” A bull of Pope Boniface declares that “all the faithful of Christ are, by necessity of salvation, subject to the Roman Pontiff, who has both swords, and judges all men, but is judged by none” [176]. Again we have to remember the claim to infallibility by the Pope, that infallibility having been recently made an article of faith in the Romish Church.
[175] “Against the Most High.” לְצַד (le-tsadh), “at the side of.” Keil observes that this term properly means against or at the side of, and is more expressive than עַל (‘al); denoting that he would use language by which he would set God aside, and would regard and give himself out as God. Compare 2Th_2:4.
[176] It is this Pope of whom Gavazzi, in the oration already quoted from, says, “Swelling with the pride and pomp of Satanic inflation, Boniface VIII., having fouliy dethroned his still living predecessor, Celestine V., burst on the world with his blasphemous bull, Unam Sanctam, and laid his monstrous mandate on mankind, involving the human race in sacerdotal serfdom. By one fell swoop he abrogated the authority of kings within their dominions, of magistrates within the circle of their attributions, of fathers within the sacred precincts of their households. Popes became arbiters of universal sovereignty, bishops bearded monarchs, and priests lorded it over the domestic hearth.… Every human right, claim, property, franchise, or feeling at variance with the predominance of the Popedom was, ipso facto, inimical to Heaven and the God of eternal justice.”
(6.) “He shall think to change times and laws” (Dan_7:25) [177]. The presence of this mark in the Papacy already apparent. Everything was to be entirely in accordance with Papal decree. The observance of saints’ days established; the marriage vow, in the case of the clergy, cancelled and marriage itself forbidden [178]; subjects, as, for example, the English in relation to Henry VIII. and Elizabeth, released from their allegiance to their sovereigns; the cup in the Lord’s Supper forbidden to the laity [179]; and the making and worshipping of images sanctioned [180]. Bishop Newton mentions also as instances of this mark of the Little Horn, the Pope’s “appointing fasts and feasts; canonising saints; granting pardons and indulgences for sins; instituting new modes of worship; imposing new articles of faith [as recently the Immaculate Conception]; enjoining new rules of practice; and reversing at pleasure the laws both of God and man.” The traditions of the Fathers and decrees of Councils are made to supersede and set aside the Word of God. “The holy and inspired fathers and teachers,” says Gregory III., “and the six Councils in Christ, these are our scriptures and our light to salvation.”
[177] “To change times and laws.” Keil observes that to “change times” belongs to the all-perfect power of God (cf. Dan_2:21), the creator and ordainer of times (Gen_1:14); and that there is no ground for supposing that זמניז (zimnin), “times,” is to be specially understood of “festivals or sacred times,” since the word, like the corresponding Hebrew one, מועֲדִים (mo’adhim), does not throughout signify merely festival times (cf. Gen_1:14; Gen_17:21; Gen_18:14, &c.) The sin is that he does not in his ordinances regard the fundamental conditions given by God, but so changes the laws of human life that he puts his own pleasure in the place of the divine arrangements, דַּת (dath), a law, rite, custom, or constitution. Calvin, applying the passage to the Roman emperors, says they perverted all laws, human and divine. Dr. Pusey, on the other hand, translates “essaying to change worship and law;” and has in a footnote,זִמְנִין (zimnin) “set times,” that is, probably, the times of the set feasts (as we speak of sacred “seasons”), and so the worship of those times. He observes that in Onkelos זִמְנִין (zimnin) stands for מוֹעֲדִים (mo’adh im), Gen_1:14; and Jonathan puts זמני מועד (zimne mo’ed) for מועד (mo’ed), Zep_3:18. Pseudo-Jonathan uses the word זמן (zeman) in paraphrasing מוֹעֲדיֵיְהֹוָה (mo’adhe Jehovah), “the feasts of the Lord.” Elsewhere זמן is used of the place of the sacred assembly (Num_1:1; Isa_33:20), but מועד of the festival (Lam_1:4; Hos_9:5).
[178] A decretal of Callixtus II. says, “We entirely interdict priests, deacons, sub-deacons, and monks from contracting marriages; we decide also that, according to the sacred canons, the marriages contracted by persons of this kind be dissolved, and the persons brought to penance.” This Pope, as well as Pope Agatho, writes that the decretal epistles of the Roman Pontiff are to be received among the Scriptures, though they are not embodied in the code of canons, just as the Old and New Testaments are so received, “because a judgment of holy Pope Innocent seems to be published” for doing so.
[179] In regard to the use of the cup, Pope Gregory VII. thus wrote to Wratislaus, king of Bohemia, “What your people ignorantly require can in no wise be conceded to them; and we now forbid it by the power of God and His holy Apostle Peter.”
[180] Gregory III. convened an assembly of 93 bishops in 732, and with their assent published a general excommunication against all who were opposed to the worship of images. The same Pope wrote to the Emperor Leo, “Do you cease to persecute images and all will be quiet.”
(7.) He was to “make war with the saints and prevail against them,” and “wear them out” (Dan_7:21; Dan_7:25). It is well known that one of the most prominent features of the Papacy in past centuries was the persecution of the saints under the name of heretics, that is, of those who refused, in matters of doctrine and practice, to submit to the authority of the Pope instead of the Word of God, and who said, with Peter and the other apostles, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Act_5:29; Act_4:19) [181]. “If any one,” said Pope Nicolas in a Council at Rome, “shall presume to dispute the dogmas, commands, interdicts, sanctions, or decrees wholesomely published by the head of the Apostolic See, let him be accursed.” “It is permitted neither to think nor to speak differently from the Roman Church.” Such were to be handed over to the secular power, to be punished with the loss of goods, imprisonment, and even death. The burning of heretics, according to the bull De Comburendo, is too well known in England. The term “Crusades” was given to those military enterprises undertaken to extirpate the Waldenses and Albigenses; and the same Papal indulgences were promised to those who fell in such undertakings as were bestowed on those who died in the wars against the infidels [182]. The “wearing out of the saints” may be seen in the decree of Pope Pelagius, that those guilty of schism or separation from the Roman See were to be “crushed by the secular power, and restrained not only by exile, but by proscription of their goods, and by severe imprisonment.” How far the Papacy “prevailed” against the saints, or so-called heretics, appears from the fact that in a Council of the Lateran, held in May 1514, about three years and a half before the breaking out of the Reformation under Luther, the Hussites were summoned to appear; and when no appearance was made, the doctor of the Council uttered the remarkable words, “There is an end to resistance to the Papal rule and religion; there is none to oppose; the whole body of Christendom is now subject to its head.”
[181] “Make war with the saints” (Dan_7:21). In our own country, in the short reign of Queen Mary, three hundred persons are said to have been cruelly put to death for no other reason than because they refused to acknowledge the supremacy of the Pope. This is written within little more than a stone’s throw of the monument that commemorates the martyrdom of Ridley, Latimer, and Cranmer, and the cross in front of Balliol College, Oxford, that marks the spot on which they suffered death. It is computed that in the South of France, between the twelfth and eighteenth centuries inclusive, about a million of those called Waldenses and Albigenses suffered death as heretics, especially by armies sent against them for that purpose, after receiving the papal blessing. Nearly a million suffered on the same account after the institution of the order of the Jesuits. In the Netherlands, it was the boast of the Duke of Alva that 36,000 heretics had been put to death by the common executioner within a few years. In Ireland, 150,000 are said to have been massacred in one province in virtue of a papal edict dated May 25, 1643, in which the Pope granted a full and plenary indulgence and absolute remission of all their sins “to all the Christians in the kingdom of Ireland, so long as they should war against the heretics and other enemies of the Catholic faith.” In the Massacre of St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1572, thirty thousand at least, in Paris and throughout France, are said to have been horribly butchered within thirty days, for which the Pope ordered public thanks to be given, and a medal to be struck in commemoration of the event. This feature of the Little Horn is acknowledged and justified in the Rhemish New Testament, where it is said in a note at Rev_17:6, that the blood of the heretics is not to be considered as the blood of the saints, but is “no more than the blood of thieves, mankillers, and other malefactors, for the shedding of which, by order of justice, no commonwealth shall answer.” So Pope Urban II., encouraging the shedding of such blood, states, “We do not count them murderers who, burning with zeal for their Catholic mother against the excommunicate, may happen to have slain some of them.” Sismondi, himself a Roman Catholic, intimates what was the crime of those whose blood was thus to be shed: “Many sects,” he says, “existed in Provence, and this was the necessary consequence of the freedom of inquiry which was the essence of their doctrine. With one accord they considered that the Romish Church had changed the nature of Christianity, and that she was the object described in the Apocalypse as the woman of Babylon.” He adds: “To maintain unity of faith, the Church had recourse to the expedient of burning all those who separated themselves from her.”
[182] “Let the Catholics,” said Innocent III. in the Lateral) Council, “who, after taking the sign of the cross, devote themselves to the extermination of heretics, enjoy the same indulgence, and be protected with the same privilege, which is granted to those who go to the succour of the Holy Land.”
(8.) The saints were to be “given into the hand” of the Little Horn for a limited period, here called “a time, times, and the dividing of a time.” This enigmatical period, found also in chap. 12, as well as in the Book of Revelation, is generally understood to be equivalent to three years and a half, or, as it is expressed in the Apocalypse, 1260 days, 360 being reckoned to a year, and also forty and two months (Rev_12:14; Rev_12:16; Rev_11:2-3; Rev_13:5 [183], the half of the “seven times” already mentioned in connection with Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity. The period in the text for the dominion of the Little Horn over the saints is also that of the “scattering or crushing of the power of the holy people” (chap. Dan_12:7); of the woman’s abode in the wilderness (Rev_12:6; Rev_12:14); of the treading of the holy city under foot by the Gentiles (Rev_12:2); of the prophesying of the two witnesses in sackcloth (Rev_12:3); and of the effective continuance of the beast out of the sea (Rev_13:5). Probably the same period, and the same experience of humiliation and suffering on the part of the saints under the same power, intended under these various symbolical representations. The three years and a half, however, might be understood either literally or figuratively; either as ordinary years, or, as they are called, prophetical ones, each day being reckoned a year. The latter is generally understood, though there may be also a fulfilment of the prophecy on the smaller as well as on the larger scale. It is remarkable that from the time that the Bishop of Rome became a temporal prince, namely, in the early part of the seventh century (A.D. 606), till the cessation of his temporal power in 1870, is just 1264 years, the period in the text on the larger or year-day scale, with perhaps four years more [184]. It is also remarkable that from the time in which all Christendom was declared to be subject to the Roman Pontiff, May 1514, to the breaking out of the Reformation under Luther, that effected the deliverance of so large a portion from his spiritual sway, was just three years and a half on the shorter or literal day scale. Twelve centuries ago, more or less, the saints, or those who chose to obey the Word of God rather than the edicts and decrees of man, seemed to be given into the hand of the Roman Pontiff. There seems little reason to doubt that happily that period of subjection has come to an end. The Papacy can no longer persecute the so-called heretics as before. The Scriptures are openly sold and the Gospel is freely preached even in Rome itself. The Inquisition is at an end. Dr. Achilli and the two Madiai were among its last prisoners, the latter having been given up at the demand of Protestant Europe. The French Revolution in 1792–3, exactly 1260 years after the edict of Justinian seemed formally to give the Church into the hands of the Roman bishop, was doubtless the commencement of his fall [185]; one of the most marked results of that event being the freedom of religious worship among the nations of Europe, which during the last ten years may be said to have been all but complete. This circumstance might seem to leave no doubt as to the identification of the Little Horn with the Papacy, and to establish the opinion that has largely prevailed for centuries [186].
[183] “A time and times and the dividing of a time” (Dan_7:26). Some have understood by this only an indefinite though lengthened period. So Calvin, who applied the prophecy to the persecutions under Nero and other Roman emperors. By the “dividing” or half of a time he understood the shortening of the period for the elect’s sakes. Bullinger viewed it as a definite time fixed by God, but known only to Himself. Œcolampadius understood half a week or three days and a half, God thus shortening the time. Osiander regarded it as three and a half prophetic years or 1278 solar years, during which the rule of Mahometanism, commencing in the year 613, should continue. Jerome, and Roman Catholic writers after him, understand it of three and a half literal years, the period for the tyranny of Antichrist before the end of the world. Similarly other Futurists. Junius and a few others applied it historically to the time during which Antiochus Epiphanes persecuted the Jews. Joseph Mede was “the well-known reviver of the year-day theory. Before his time it was a vague assertion; he first gave it shape and form, and plausible consistency. Since his day it has been adopted by many intelligent critics, among whom are Sir Isaac Newton, Bishop Newton, Faber, Frere, Keith, and Birks.”—Translator’s Preface to Calvin on Daniel. Professor Lee refers the expression to “the latter half (mystically speaking) of the seventieth week of our prophet” (ch. 9); that week of seven days being equivalent here to Ezekiel’s period of seven years. Professor Bush says, “The grand principle into which the usage of a day for a year is to be resolved is that of miniature symbolisation.” Mr. Brooks (Elements of Prophetic Interpretation) says, “The literal meaning of a ‘time’ is a year; and the expression in Dan_7:23 may signify, mystically, if calculated by lunar time, a period of 1260 years.” Mr. Bickersteth (Practical Guide to the Prophecies) says, “The time, times, and half a time, the forty and two months and 1260 days, are the same interval; the time, times, and half a time of Daniel and the Revelation are the same period; a prophetic day is a natural year, as three and a half times are the half of seven times, the whole season of Gentile power, and the same with the ‘latter times’ of St. Paul” He thinks the three and a half times began with Justinian’s Code in 532–533. “By this edict (of Justinian),” says Mr. Irving, “ecclesiastical power over the faith of the West and against the saints who dwelt there was given to the Bishop of Rome, which imperial edicts being seconded by the imperial arms, brought to nothing the heretical powers who might have opposed his entering into possession. In twenty years from that date he ordered heretics to be burned by the temporal powers—the first indication of that mixture and combination of powers, civil and ecclesiastical, which is the proper character of the whole period. Then, also, mass was introduced. In sixty years he had made such great strides towards absolute supremacy, that in the reign of Gregory the Great, who resisted the Bishop of Constantinople’s supremacy, were introduced purgatory, invocation of saints, expiations by masses, lustrations of the Blessed Virgin, and the celibacy of the clergy was attempted. In seventy years he obtained from the emperor the sole title of Universal Bishop. In little more than a century the service was performed in Latin, and the ignorance of the people sealed. In two centuries the Pope had obtained the pride and power to excommunicate the Emperor of the East for prohibiting image-worship.” Dr. Cox thinks that “the computation must be made from the period when the Little Horn or ecclesiastical power of the Church of Rome should arise;” and that “that application of the prophecy is most probable which fixes on the time when, by the decree of Phocas, the Roman Pontiff was constituted Universal Bishop and supreme head of the Church.” This was in the year of our Lord 606. Some students of prophecy see in the term “times,” &c, the half of the period of Nebuchadnezzar’s humiliation and insanity, symbolical of the time (2520 years) during which the covenant people should be under the dominion of the Gentile monarchies as the chastisement of their unfaithfulness, this period having different crises as stages of commencement. Of these, Mr. Guinness (Approaching End of the Age) mentions four, from the invasion of Pul, king of Assyria, in 770 b.c., to the final fall of the throne of David and full captivity of Judah under Nebuchadnezzar in 602. These stages of commencement have corresponding terminations, the first being in 1750, the period of Voltaire, and the last in 1918, yet to come. It was during the latter half of these mystical “seven times” that the Little Horn was to have power over the saints, the case of Israel being bound up with that of the Christian Church, which was to be under captivity by the same power that was to tyrannise over Israel, namely, the last of the four beasts. See farther the note under chap. Dan_12:7.
[184] The spiritual power of the Papacy may, of course, have a different period for its termination, and outlive the temporal, which constituted it the Little Horn. Mr. Bosanquet remarks: “We see no room left for doubt that these 1260 years mark the duration of the Papal power. The temporal power of the Papacy seems to be vanishing before our eyes, if indeed it has not already ceased to exist [it has apparently done so, namely, in 1870], but how long the spiritual power shall be allowed to linger on in the ancient seat of its dominion, is a question to be solved by time. Wherever we may be disposed to fix the date of its commencement, it is clear that the time of expiration cannot be very far remote.” Some, however, date from the eighth century. “From the time,” says Bishop Newton, “of Pepin’s grant of Aistulph’s dominions in 755, the popes, having now become temporal princes, did no longer date their epistles and bulls by the year of the Emperor’s reign, but by the year of their own advancement to the Papal chair. Charles the Great, son and successor of Pepin, confirmed the grant, adding other territories, and giving the Pope to hold under himself the duchy of Rome, over which he gradually obtained the absolute authority, being about the same time declared superior to all human jurisdiction, while Charles in return was chosen Emperor of the West. Lewis the Pious, son and successor to Charles the Great, confirmed the donations of his father and grandfather, including Rome and its duchy, the popes to hold them in their own right, principality, and dominion to the end of the world.” “It should seem,” adds the Bishop, “that the ‘time, times,’ &c., are to be computed from this full establishment of the power of the Pope in the eighth century.” Gibbon speaks of Gregory I., who wrote so defiantly against the Emperor Leo about images in the eighth century, as the founder of the Papal monarchy; and Milner says, “From this time I look on the Pope of Rome as Antichrist.”
[185] One of the effects of the Revolution in 1792–3 was the destruction of the established religion in France, the chief support of the Papacy. As the edict of Justinian in 533 might be said to be the beginning of the Little Horn as a temporal power, and the giving of the saints into his hand, though its full growth was not for some time after, so the commencement of his fall as such, and the deliverance of the saints from his hand, might be dated from the French Revolution, though not to be completed till several years afterwards. The Convention, which met on the 20th September 1792, first decreed the eternal abolition of monarchy, and on the seventh day of its sitting, it was proposed by M. Manuel that, as royalty was abolished, the order of priests and all religious establishments should be abolished with it. This, however, was only done on the 31st of May in the following year, when the success of the Jacobin conspirators completed the destruction of the civil establishment of religion in France. On the 17th of June the report of Camille Jourdan on the freedom of religious worship was ordered to be printed by the unanimous vote of the Council of Five Hundred.
[186] It was the belief of the Early Church that the little horn of Daniel and the “Man of Sin” spoken of by Paul (2 Thessalonians 2.) was the same Antichrist, who was even expected shortly to appear. Justin Martyr says, “He being at hand who was to speak blasphemous words against the Most High, whom the prophet Daniel foretold was to continue for a time, times, &c.” Tertullian, referring to 2 Thessalonians 2., says, “Who can this be but the Roman State, the division of which into ten kingdoms will bring on Antichrist, and then the Wicked One shall be revealed?” Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, about the year 360, referring to the same passage, says, “Thus the predicted Antichrist will come when the times of the Roman empire shall be fulfilled, and the consummation of the world shall approach. Ten kings of the Romans shall rise together, in different places indeed, but they shall reign at the same time. Among them the eleventh is Antichrist, who by magical and wicked artifices shall seize the Roman power.” Cyril believed that the apostasy or falling away which was to precede the appearance of the Man of Sin, or Antichrist, had already taken place in his day. “Formerly,” he says, “the heretics were manifest, but now the Church is filled with heretics in disguise. For men have fallen away from the truth, and have itching ears. Is it a plausible theory? All listen to it gladly. Is it a word of correction? All turn away from it. Most have departed from right words, and rather choose the evil than desire the good. This therefore is the falling away, and the Enemy (Antichrist) is soon to be looked for.”
As yet probably they had no idea that the Bishop of Rome was to be he; for his coming was to be a “mystery of iniquity,” and “mystery” was to be the name of the system of which he was the head, as the word is said to be actually found on the Papal mitre. But a few centuries awoke the suspicion. In the Middle Ages it was believed by many that the Antichrist had already appeared in the person of the Popes. In the tenth century Arnulph, Bishop of Orleans, addressing a Council at Rheims, said: “O deplorable Rome, who in the days of our forefathers produced so many burning and shining lights! thou hast brought forth in our times only dismal darkness worthy of the detestation of posterity.… What think you, reverend fathers, of this man, the Pope, placed on a lofty throne, shining with purple and gold? Whom do you account him? If destitute of love and puffed up with pride of knowledge only, he is Antichrist sitting in the temple of God.” It is said in a work published in 1120, “The great Antichrist is already come; in vain is he yet expected; already by the permission of God is he advanced in years.” Roman Catholic writers, of course, refuse to believe that the Papacy is “the Little Horn or Antichrist;” and some few Protestants agree with them in thinking that that power is still future; while others, as the German Rationalists, would see in it only Antiochus Epiphanes. In reference to this last opinion, it is enough to say, with Auberlen, that the Little Horn is found among the ten kingdoms of the fourth beast or Roman Empire, while Antiochus Epiphanes belonged to the third or Grecian, which, according to chap. 8, is well known to have been divided, not into ten, but into four kingdoms. That the Roman Empire was broken up into about ten different kingdoms many centuries ago, and that the Papacy, as a temporal power, sprung up among them, are facts not to be disputed.
From the prophecy regarding the Little Horn we may notice—
1. The providence of God as ruling both in the world and in the Church. “He putteth down one and setteth up another.” Even the Little Horn, which was to prove such a scourge to the Church and to the world, was entirely under His control, and employed as His instrument in accomplishing the purposes of His infinite wisdom. The saints were to be “given” into His hand, as Judah and its king were given into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar (chap. Dan_1:2). The same Providence limited the continuance of the subjection in both cases. What is done wickedly by man is permitted and controlled wisely and holily by God.
2. The comfort of God’s people to know that their sufferings are meted out, both in intensity and duration, by a Father’s hand. It was a fiery trial that was to try the saints when they were to be given into the hand of the Little Horn, who was to make war upon them, and prevail against them, and wear them out. But it was to continue only for a time, a long time indeed, as indicated in the expression “a time, times, and the dividing of a time;” but still it was to come to an end. “Thou shalt have tribulation ten days,”—not more. “In measure when it shooteth forth, Thou wilt debate with it: He stayeth His rough wind in the day of His east wind” (Isa_27:8). The “time to favour Zion, even the set time,” comes.
3. The preciousness and power of divine grace in sustaining the people of God under protracted persecutions and afflictions. No small affliction to the saints who held fast the Word of God to have war made upon them by a mighty and prevailing power, and to be worn out by exile, imprisonment, and loss of goods, year after year, the same thing being continued century after century. No small amount of grace needed to sustain them in the conflict, so as to be faithful unto death. But the promise is sure. “My grace is sufficient for thee; my strength is made perfect in weakness.” “As thy days, so shall thy strength be.” Though appointed as sheep to the slaughter, we are made more than conquerors through Him that loved us. “They overcame through the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony.”
4. The divine, and therefore indestructible, nature of the Church and religion of Jesus Christ, which has held out under centuries of cruel persecution. To exhibit this, probably one reason why such a state of things is permitted to take place. The bush burns, but is not consumed, because the Lord Himself is in it. The gates and power of hell unable to prevail against the Church of Christ, because founded on the Rock of Ages. The Church outlives the furnace, because One like the Son of God—the Son of God Himself—is with it there. “If this counsel or work be of men, it will come to nought; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it.” “Although,” says Sismondi, himself a Roman Catholic, “for two hundred years the fires were never quenched, still every day saw Catholics abjuring the faith of their fathers, and embracing the religion which often guided them to the stake. In vain Gregory IX., in 1231, put to death every heretic whom he found concealed in Rome.”
5. Cause for joy and thanksgiving that the wearing out of the saints by the Little Horn is at or near its close. There may yet be possibly a period of intense suffering from that same Little Horn under a changed aspect; but if so, it will be but of short continuance; perhaps the “time, times, and dividing of a time,” on the shorter literal day scale. But we may well rejoice and give thanks that the long-protracted period of “wearing out” is at an end. The fires of Smithfield and the tortures of the Inquisition, we may believe, are over. Even in Rome men may read the Bible and worship God according to it without being afraid. Let us thank God for liberty of conscience in Europe.
6. The prediction regarding the Little Horn, with its manifest fulfilment, another remarkable evidence of divine inspiration. That horn, as rising out of the fourth beast, and among the other ten, acknowledged not to be Antiochus Epiphanes, and must therefore be found long after the time when the prophecy was written. The prediction minute and detailed; and its fulfilment, in a power that for twelve centuries has been the most prominent and conspicuous one in Europe, singularly exact. The fulfilment of such prediction, though perfectly natural, yet partaking of the nature of a miracle, as being beyond any mere human power to foresee it, and as such an evidence of the divine origin of the prediction.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On vv7, 8, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19 A horn symbolizes a king. Cf. Rev 17:12.
horns
A horn symbolizes a king. Cf. Rev 17:12.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On v15 The Interpretation of the Vision
The Interpretation of the Vision
v. 15. I, Daniel, was grieved in my spirit in the midst of my body, for the body contains the spirit as the scabbard contains the sword, and the visions of my head troubled me, he felt apprehensive concerning them.
Read full note →
v. 16. I came near unto one of them that stood by, one of those engaged in the service of God, and asked him the truth of all this, the true explanation of the judgment scene which was here enacted. So he told me and made me know the interpretation of the things, so that Daniel understood the vision in all its parts.
v. 17. These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, the heads of mighty empires, each one the founder of a dynasty, which shall arise out of the earth, from the surface of the earth, of the earth, earthy.
v. 18. But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom, receiving it as a gift from above, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever. The true members of the covenant nation, the believers of the New Testament, the congregation of the Lord, gathered from the elect of all nations, are, by virtue of their faith in the Messiah, possessors of the kingdom of God, they enjoy all the blessings of the Lord in this relationship to the Messiah and to their heavenly Father here in time and hereafter in eternity.
v. 19. Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, that is, Daniel was anxious to know, he desired to be informed, about this beast also, which was diverse from all the others, so utterly different from them, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron and his nails of brass, the feature of the brazen claws being added in this description; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet;
v. 20. and of the ten horns that were in his head and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell, even of that horn that had eyes and a mouth that spake very great things, in boastful blasphemy, whose look was more stout than his fellows, that is, his appearance was such as to inspire terror.
v. 21. I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints and prevailed against them, this being apart of its campaign of destruction, it involved a temporary defeat of the forces of the Lord,
v. 22. until the Ancient of Days came, the true and only God coming to judgment upon His enemies, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High, for the Lord took their part and effected their deliverance from the oppression of the beast; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom, the Church holding the blessings of the Lord even here in time, in spite of all hostility of Satan and his evil forces, and entering into undisturbed possession of them in the Kingdom of Glory.
v. 23. Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, following the Babylonian, the Medo-Persian, and the Greek empire, respectively, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces, the general effect of its rule being decidedly destructive.
v. 24. And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise, that is, the Roman Empire, upon its disintegration, would be resolved into a number of smaller states, all of which would, however, carryon the traditions of the mother state and still be one in spirit with her; and another shall rise after them, a ruler wielding a great deal of power, and he shall be diverse from the first, differing from his predecessors, and he shall subdue three kings, causing them completely to lose their identity.
v. 25. And he shall speak great words against the Most High, in blasphemies of an unusually vicious character, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High and think to change times and laws, setting aside human and divine laws at will; and they shall be given into his hand, for him practically to work his will as he chose, until a time and times and the dividing of time, the entire length of time, divided into three distinct periods, being figured in terms of God’s time.
v. 26. But the judgment shall sit, the sentence will be carried out, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end, so that its final destruction is not to be expected before the end of the world.
v. 27. And the kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, throughout the world, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, so that the Church of the Lord would finally be victorious, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey Him. Cf Eph 1:21-22; Col 1:16.
v. 28. Hitherto is the end of the matter, this is the gist of the vision. As for me, Daniel, my cogitations much troubled me, namely, after he awoke from his dream, and my countenance changed in me, his face showed the effect of his worry over the matter; but I kept the matter in my heart, he did not make it known, did not discuss it with others.
The interpretation of this vision may briefly be given as follows. The lion with the eagle’s wings was the Babylonian Empire, whose victorious progress was halted about the time that Nebuchadnezzar was stricken with the peculiar madness, which caused him to seek the fellowship of beasts, which, however, later received at least some understanding of the true God. The bear which raised himself up on one side is the Medo-Persian Empire, whose warlike nature is testified to in secular accounts. The leopard upon whose back wings appeared is the Grecian Empire, which, under Alexander the Great, spread over the world with great rapidity. The fourth beast is the Roman Empire with its insatiable fierceness and love of conquest, whose spiritual descendant and successor is the kingdom of Antichrist, of the Pope at Rome, just as delineated in the Book of Revelation. The ancient empire indeed came to an end, but it was revived in the empire of Charles the Great, and the political power of the Pope is felt in practically every nation of the earth today. Practically every feature of the description fits the rule of the Roman Antichrist from the very start. The kingdom of the Pope grew up like a horn, exerting its political power very gradually, but none the less surely. From small beginnings it developed until it reached a station in which it practically controlled the fate of nations. The Popes have, in many cases, made use of the highest wisdom, together with an almost diabolical cunning, to further their cause. By dint of their cunning they made their authority felt in the counsels of nations; they have impressed people with their power far above the real status of affairs. The kingdom of the Pope is unlike every other kingdom, since he exerts political power under the guise of spreading the kingdom of God. Time and again the Pope of Rome has spoken blasphemous words against the one true God. History records numerous instances of persecutions carried on by Popes and their millions, as during the terrible inquisitions. Popes have altered the Word of God to suit their own convenience and to serve their selfish interests. In spite of the reverses which the kingdom of Antichrist has suffered in the past, as when Emperor Otto I deposed Pope John XII, when the councils of the fifteenth century tried to effect at least an outward reformation, and, above all, when Martin Luther carried the fight into the enemy’s ranks, the kingdom of Antichrist will remain till the end of time. Cf 2 Thessalonians 2; Revelation 17. The prophecy of Daniel was fulfilled and is being fulfilled in a most remarkable manner, a fact which tends to strengthen our faith in every word of the Bible.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23 General Information:
General Information:
Daniel continues to describe his vision of the fourth animal that the saw in Daniel 7:7.
Read full note →
the horns
Translators may write a footnote like this: "Horns are a symbol of power and represent powerful leaders." (See: Metonymy)
Three of the first horns were wrenched out by the roots
This can be stated in active form. AT: "The little horn tore out three of the first horns" (See: Active or Passive)
a mouth that was boasting about great things
Here the horn was boasting, using its mouth to do so. AT: "the horn had a mouth and boasted about doing great things" (See: Synecdoche)
translationWords
boast
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24 7:7 The fourth beast was different in kind, not…
7:7 The fourth beast was different in kind, not just degree. It was made of nonliving metal. It was hardly animal; it was impersonal, utterly violent, and merciless, and even its iron teeth were a perfect killing machine. Most commentators, both ancient and modern, find this fourth beast best embodied in the Roman Empire and its kings. • ten horns: In this kind of apocalyptic literature, horns can stand for kings, power, and strength.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.