Daniel 7:9 Ulasan

The six former chapters of this book were historical; we now enter with fear and trembling upon the six latter, which are prophetical, wherein are many things dark and hard to be understood, which we dare not positively determine the sense of, and yet many things plain and profitable, which I trust God will enable us to make a good use of. In this chapter we have, I. Daniel's vision of the four beasts (Dan 7:1-8). II. His vision of God's throne of government and judgment (Dan 7:9-14). III. The interpretation of these visions, given him by an angel that stood by (Dan 7:15-28). Whether those visions look as far forward as the end of time, or whether they were to have a speedy accomplishment, is hard to say, nor are the most judicious interpreters agreed concerning it.

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. 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.

INTRODUCTION TO DANIEL 7 This chapter contains Daniel's vision of the four beasts, The time, place, manner, writing, and declaration of the vision, Dan 7:1, the rise of the beasts, and the description of them, Dan 7:2, the judgment of God upon them, especially the last, and the delivery of universal monarchy to his Son, Dan 7:9, the interpretation of the vision at the request of Daniel, being greatly affected with it, Dan 7:15, a particular inquiry of his about the fourth beast, concerning which a full account is given, Dan 7:19, all which caused in him many thoughts of heart, and reflections of mind, Dan 7:28.

I beheld till the thrones were cast down,.... On which the governors of the above monarchies sat; and those of the ten kings, signified by the ten horns; and also that of the little horn. The prophet kept looking on the objects before him, till he in his dream, and the visions of the night, saw all those empires and kingdoms demolished, and all rule, power, and authority, put down, and way made for the glorious kingdom of the Messiah, and his saints with him; to this sense Aben Ezra, Saadiah, and Jacchiades, interpret the word used; but the Septuagint, Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Arabic versions, render it, "until the thrones were set up" (q); for the judges to sit upon to try, judge, and condemn the four beasts or monarchies; in order to make way for the kingdom of the Son of man to take place in the spirituality and glory of it: here are more thrones than one; see Rev 20:4, one for the Ancient of days, and another for him who was like to the Son of man, brought near before him; and so the Jews (r) say, here were two thrones pitched and prepared, one for the Ancient of days, and another for David, that is, the Messiah, or Son of David; and so Jarchi paraphrases the words, "the thrones were pitched and prepared to sit upon in judgment:'' and this sense is confirmed by the use of the word in Ezr 7:24 and in the Targum on Kg2 18:14 and to this agrees best the following clause: and the Ancient of days did sit; on one of the thrones pitched, as chief Judge: this is to be understood of God the Father, as distinct from the Messiah, the Son of God, said to be like the Son of man brought unto him, Dan 7:13 and is so called, not only because he is from everlasting, and without beginning of days; but chiefly because he is permanent, and endures for ever; his years fail not, and of his days there will be no end; and he will be when these empires, signified by the four beasts, will be no more; and very fit to be Judge of them, because of his consummate wisdom and prudence, signified also by this phrase; and the divine Father of Christ is still more proper, because it is in Christ's cause the judgment will proceed; and this in order to introduce him openly into his dominions in the world: whose garment was white as snow; denoting the purity of his nature, the brightness of his majesty, and his uncorruptness in judgment: and the hair of his head like the pure wool; signifying his venerableness, gravity, wisdom, and ripeness of judgment; being wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working: his throne was like the fiery flame; expressive of him, as awful and formidable, as a consuming fire; and of his piercing judgment, and the severity of it: and his wheels as burning fire; the wheels of his throne; alluding to such seats and thrones as were made to turn about, and to be moved from place to place; denoting the power and providence of God everywhere; the clear view he has of all things, in all places; and his swiftness in the execution of his judgments. (q) "subsellia posita sunt", Tigurine version; "solia posita sunt", Piscator, Cocceius; "throni elati sunt", Pagninus, Montanus. (r) T. Bab. Chagiga, fol. 14. 1. & Gloss in ib.

But if so great a power is shown to have followed and to be still following the dispensation of His suffering, how great shall that be which shall follow His glorious advent! For He shall come on the clouds as the Son of man, so Daniel foretold, and His angels shall come with Him. These are the words: [quotes Daniel 7:9-28]

The Ancient of Days is, for Daniel, nothing more than the Lord, God and Master of all, the Father of Christ himself.

1. In speaking of a "lioness from the sea," he meant the rising of the kingdom of Babylon, and that this was the "golden head of the image." And in speaking of its "eagle wings," be meant that king Nebuchadnezzar was exalted and that his glory was lifted up against God. Then he says "its wings were plucked off," i.e., that his glory was destroyed; for he was driven out of his kingdom. And the words, "A man's heart was given it, and it was made stand upon the feet of a man," mean that he came to himself again, and recognised that he was but a man, and gave the glory to God. Then after the lioness he sees a second beast, "like a bear," which signified the Persians. For after the Babylonians the Persians obtained the power. And in saying that "it had three ribs in its mouth," he pointed to the three nations, Persians, Medes, and Babylonians, which were expressed in the image by the silver after the gold. Then comes the third beast, "a leopard," which means the Greeks; for after the Persians, Alexander of Macedon had the power, when Darius was overthrown, which was also indicated by the brass in the image. And in saying that the beast "had four wings of a fowl, and four heads," he showed most clearly how the kingdom of Alexander was parted into four divisions. For in speaking of four heads, he meant the four kings that arose out of it. For Alexander, when dying, divided his kingdom into four parts. Then he says, "The fourth beast (was) dreadful and terrible: it had iron teeth, and claws of brass." Who, then, are meant by this but the Romans, whose kingdom, the kingdom that still stands, is expressed by the iron? "for," says he, "its legs are of iron." 2. After this, then, what remains, beloved, but the toes of the feet of the image, in which "part shall be of iron and part of clay mixed together? "By the toes of the feet he meant, mystically, the ten kings that rise out of that kingdom. As Daniel says, "I considered the beast; and, lo, (there were) ten horns behind, among which shall come up another little horn springing from them; "by which none other is meant than the antichrist that is to rise; and he shall set up the kingdom of Judah. And in saying that "three horns" were "plucked up by the roots" by this one, he indicates the three kings of Egypt, Libya, and Ethiopia, whom this one will slay in the array of war. And when he has conquered all, he will prove himself a terrible and savage tyrant, and will cause tribulation and persecution to the saints, exalting himself against them. And after him, it remains that "the stone" shall come from heaven which "smote the image" and shivered it, and subverted all the kingdoms, and gave the kingdom to the saints of the Most High. This "became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth." 3. As these things, then, are destined to come to pass, and as the toes of the image turn out to be democracies, and the ten horns of the beast are distributed among ten kings, let us look at what is before us more carefully, and scan it, as it were, with open eye. The "golden head of the image" is identical with the "lioness," by which the Babylonians were represented. "The golden shoulders and the arms of silver" are the same with the "bear," by which the Persians and Medes are meant. "The belly and thighs of brass" are the "leopard," by which the Greeks who ruled from Alexander onwards are intended. The "legs of iron" are the "dreadful and terrible beast," by which the Romans who hold the empire now are meant. The "toes of clay and iron" are the "ten horns" which are to be. The "one other little horn springing up in their midst" is the "antichrist." The stone that "smites the image and breaks it in pieces," and that filled the whole earth, is Christ, who comes from heaven and brings judgment on the world. 4. But that we may not leave our subject at this point undemonstrated, we are obliged to discuss the matter of the times, of which a man should not speak hastily, because they are a light to him. For as the times are noted from the foundation of the world, and reckoned from Adam, they set clearly before us the matter with which our inquiry deals. For the first appearance of our Lord in the flesh took place in Bethlehem, under Augustus, in the year 5500; and He suffered in the thirty-third year. And 6,000 years must needs be accomplished, in order that the Sabbath may come, the rest, the holy day "on which God rested from all His works." For the Sabbath is the type and emblem of the future kingdom of the saints, when they "shall reign with Christ," when He comes from heaven, as John says in his Apocalypse: for "a day with the Lord is as a thousand years." Since, then, in six days God made all things, it follows that 6,000 years must be fulfilled. And they are not yet fulfilled, as John says: "five are fallen; one is," that is, the sixth; "the other is not yet come." 5. In mentioning the "other," moreover, he specifies the seventh, in which there is rest. But some one may be ready to say, How will you prove to me that the Saviour was born in the year 5500? Learn that easily, O man; for the things that took place of old in the wilderness, under Moses, in the case of the tabernacle, were constituted types and emblems of spiritual mysteries, in order that, when the truth came in Christ in these last days, you might be able to perceive that these things were fulfilled. For He says to him, "And thou shalt make the ark of imperishable wood, and shalt overlay it with pure gold within and without; and thou shalt make the length of it two cubits and a half, and the breadth thereof one cubit and a half, and a cubit and a half the height;" which measures, when summed up together, make five cubits and a half, so that the 5500 years might be signified thereby. 6. At that time, then, the Saviour appeared and showed His own body to the world, (born) of the Virgin, who was the "ark overlaid with pure gold," with the Word within and the Holy Spirit without; so that the truth is demonstrated, and the "ark" made manifest. From the birth of Christ, then, we must reckon the 500 years that remain to make up the 6000, and thus the end shall be. And that the Saviour appeared in the world, bearing the imperishable ark, His own body, at a time which was the fifth and half, John declares: "Now it was the sixth hour," he says, intimating by that, one-half of the day. But a day with the Lord is 10000 years; and the half of that, therefore, is 500 years. For it was not meet that He should appear earlier, for the burden of the law still endured, nor yet when the sixth day was fulfilled (for the baptism is changed), but on the fifth and half, in order that in the remaining half time the gospel might be preached to the whole world, and that when the sixth day was completed He might end the present life. 7. Since, then, the Persians held the mastery for 330 years, and after them the Greeks, who were yet more glorious, held it for 300 years, of necessity the fourth beast, as being strong and mightier than all that were before it, will reign 500 years. When the times are fulfilled, and the ten horns spring from the beast in the last (times), then Antichrist will appear among them. When he makes war against the saints, and persecutes them, then may we expect the manifestation of the Lord from heaven.

Next they come to Libnah, which means “whitewashing.” I know that in some respects whitewashing has a pejorative connotation, as when we speak of a “whitewashed wall” and “whitewashed tombs.” But this whitewashing is that concerning which the prophet says, “You will wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.” And again Isaiah says, “Though your sins are like scarlet, I will whiten them like snow and will make them white like wool.” Again in the psalm, “They were whitened with snow in Zalmon.” And the hair of the Ancient of Days is said to be dazzling, white, that is, white like wool. So then, this whitewashing must be understood to come from the radiance of the true light and to descend from the brightness of heavenly visions.

When the thrones are set and the Ancient of Days takes his seat, and the books are opened, and the fiery stream comes forth, and the light before him and the darkness prepared … they that have done good shall go into the resurrection of life, now hid in Christ and to be manifested hereafter with him, and they that have done evil, into the resurrection of judgment, to which they who have not believed have been condemned already by the word that judges them. Some will be welcomed by the unspeakable light and the vision of the holy and royal Trinity, which now shines on them with greater brilliancy and purity and unites itself wholly to the whole soul, in which solely and beyond all else I take it that the kingdom of heaven consists. The others, among other torments, but above and before them all must endure the being outcast from God and the shame of conscience that has no limit.

Remember the vision of Daniel and how he brings the judgment before us … clearly disclosing in the hearing of all, angels and human beings, things good and evil, things done openly and in secret, deeds, words and thoughts all at once. What then must those people be who have lived wicked lives? Where then shall that soul hide that in the sight of all these spectators shall suddenly be revealed in its fullness of shame? With what kind of body shall it sustain those endless and unbearable pangs … without end? There is no release after death; no device, no means of coming forth from the chastisement of pain.

Let him then be standing for you that you may not be afraid of him sitting; for when sitting he judges, as Daniel says, “the thrones were placed, and the books were opened, and the Ancient of Days did sit.” But in Psalm 81 [82] it is written, “God stood in the congregation of gods and decides among the gods.” So then when he sits he judges, when he stands he decides, and he judges concerning the imperfect but decides among the gods. Let him stand for you as a defender, as a good shepherd, lest the fierce wolves assault you.

Are they not the thrones concerning which our Lord said, “You will sit on twelve thrones”? … Beloved, do not imagine God as having anything like a body, and do not think that God, who is boundless, can be confined to a throne. For if “in his hands are the boundaries of the earth,” and if “he erected the mountains,” and if “all the nations are reckoned as spittle in his sight” and if “all things are as dust before him,” as he himself says, what place would be able to enclose him altogether at one time? What shall we say? The state of affairs cannot be exactly as it is described; God is not confined to a throne. If he was wearing clothing, how would fire not consume it? And why is that one called the Ancient of Days, when he existed before all ages? In what way can he even be said to be ancient, since the Scripture says, “You are always the same.” Why then is he called ancient, when it is written, “And your years will not come to an end?” And what would be the garment to be cast around a boundless and incorporeal being? For it says, “There is no end to his greatness.” And again, “If I ascend into heaven, you are there; if I descend into hell, you are there.” How then can he be restrained by human clothing and yet not consume it? But truly the prophet was able to see and read many other things of this type. How were his hairs not burned with fire?

Let us strive with our minds to understand, beloved, for it is no small matter that we are discussing. He says, “Thrones were set, and the Ancient of Days was seated.” Who is he? When you heard about a bear, you did not think about a bear; when you heard about a lioness, you did not perceive that animal but rather kingdoms; and when you heard about the sea, you did not perceive a sea but rather the world. Each time you thought of something else as being present in those images. That is also the case now. What is an Ancient of Days? He is similar to an old man. Now this old man takes shape for the purposes for which he appears. And here he shows that old men must be entrusted with rendering judgment. For just as when you hear the word throne, you do not understand it to mean a mere chair—for who would lay hold of such a base and vulgar meaning, when God seems fully armed here and bloodthirsty there?—so he wishes this to mean that it is a time for judgment. “His clothing was white as snow.” Why? It is not only a time of judgment but also retribution. All those must stand before him because “his judgment will go forth like the light.”

And again, “The Ancient of Days sat,” here again, taking the term “ancient” as among those laudatory expressions that confer highest glory. Elsewhere the Scripture takes the term “old” in the sense of blame; for seeing that the things are of various aspects as being composed of many parts, it uses the same words both in a good and an evil import, not according to the same shade of meaning.

Verse 9. "I beheld until thrones were set up, and the Ancient of days took His seat. His garment was as white as snow, and the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was composed of fiery flames and its wheels were set on fire. From before His presence there issued forth a rushing, fiery stream." We read something similar in John's Apocalypse: "After these things I was immediately in the Spirit, and lo, a throne was set up in heaven, and one was seated upon the throne; and He who sat upon it had the likeness of jasper and sardine stone, and there was a rainbow round about the throne like the appearance of emerald. Around the throne there were twenty-four other thrones, and upon the twenty-four thrones there sat twenty-four elders, clothed in shining garments; upon their heads was a golden crown, and lightning flashes issued from the throne, and voices and thunder. And in front of the throne there were seven torches of burning fire, which were the seven spirits of God. And in front of the throne lay a glassy sea like unto crystal." (Revelation 4:2-6) And so the many thrones which Daniel saw seem to me to be what John called the twenty-four thrones. And the Ancient of days is the One who, according to John sits alone upon His throne. Likewise the Son of man, who came unto the Ancient of days, is the same as He who, according to John, is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, and the titles of that sort (Revelation 5:5). I imagine that these thrones are the ones of which the Apostle Paul says, "Whether thrones or dominions..." (Colossians 1:16). And in the Gospel we read, "Ye yourselves shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Matthew 19:28). And God is called the One who sits and who is the Ancient of days, in order that His character as eternal Judge might be indicated. His garment is shining white like the snow, and the hair of His head is like pure wool. The Savior also, when He was transfigured on the mount and assumed the glory of His divine majesty, appeared in shining white garments (Matthew 17:2). And as for the fact that His hair is compared to perfectly pure wool, the even-handedness and uprightness of His judgment is shown forth, a judgment which shows no partiality in its exercise. Moreover He is described as an elderly man, in order that the ripeness of His judgment may be established. His throne consists of fiery flames, in order that sinners may tremble before the severity of the torments, and also that the just may be saved, but so as by fire. The wheels of the throne are set aflame, or else it is the wheels of His chariot which are aflame. In Ezekiel also God is ushered on the scene seated in a four-horse chariot (Ezekiel 1:4-28), and everything pertaining to God is of a fiery consistency. In another place also a statement is made on this subject: "God is a consuming fire" (Deuteronomy 4:24), that we might know that wood, hay and stubble are going to burn up in the day of judgment. And in the Psalms we read: "Fire goeth before Him, and He shall set aflame all His enemies round about Him" (Psalm 97:3). A rushing, fiery stream proceeded from before Him in order that it might carry sinners to hell (Gehenna).

This is spoken anthropomorphically. And its spiritual sense is that he is the king of those who are not defiled with sins. For God says, “Your sins shall be as white as snow and shall be as wool.” Wool is the emblem of forgiveness of sins, as also of innocence.

It is fitting for us to know that God is incorporeal, simple and without form and that he admits of no circumscription. Although it pertains to his nature not to be able to be circumscribed, very often to help us he makes use of visions, whenever he wills. And one can see that he appears to Abraham in one way, to Moses in another and to Isaiah in yet another; likewise, he showed Ezekiel still a different appearance. Therefore, whenever you see the variety of revelation, do not think that God has many forms, but rather listen to God as he speaks through the prophet Hosea: “I multiplied the visions, and I was proclaimed in parables in the warnings of the prophets.” He said, “I adopted likenesses,” not I appeared. He fashions in a vision however it suits him. So too blessed Ezekiel, when he had at length pondered on him whom he had seen to consist of gold and fire, added as he narrated the vision, “These things are an image of the glory of the Lord.” And he did not say that he had seen the Lord or even the Lord’s glory but rather something resembling the glory of the Lord.

Daniel contemplates his pure hair and his splendid garb, altogether blameless and holy. Daniel had already learned not only his divine nature but also those things that can be understood about it, namely, his righteousness, providence, care and judgment. When he sees “a horn using haughty words” and plotting countless treacheries against the worshipers of God, Daniel understands through the purity that glistens everywhere that God is not neglecting his people, but out of his ineffable governance of history he is permitting the horn to dare such things.

Through the throne, wheels and river God’s nature is revealed as secure and liable to no reproach; and through the word ancient his eternity, wisdom and clemency is told.

By “things of old” he means things eternal, confined neither beginning nor end; as we read in Daniel: “Thrones were placed, and the Old of Days sat.”

The prophet having, in the preceding chapters of this book, related some remarkable events concerning himself and his brethren in the captivity, and given proof of his being enabled, by Divine assistance, to interpret the dreams of others, enters now into a detail of his own visions, returning to a period prior to the transactions recorded in the last chapter. The first in order of the prophet's visions is that of the four beasts, which arose out of a very tempestuous ocean, Dan 7:1-9; and of one like the Son of man who annihilated the dominion of the fourth beast, because of the proud and blasphemous words of one of its horns, Dan 7:9-14. An angel deciphers the hieroglyphics contained in this chapter, declaring that the Four beasts, diverse one from another, represent the Four Paramount empires of the habitable globe, which should succeed each other; and are evidently the same which were shadowed forth to Nebuchadnezzar by another set of hieroglyphics, (see the second chapter), Dan 7:15-26. But for the consolation of the people of God, it is added that, at the time appointed in the counsel of Jehovah, "the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the saints of the Most High;" and that this kingdom shall never be destroyed or transferred to another people, as all the preceding dominations have been, but shall itself stand for ever, Dan 7:27, Dan 7:28. It will be proper to remark that the period of a time, times, and a half, mentioned in the twenty-fifth verse as the duration of the dominion of the little horn that made war with the saints, (generally supposed to be a symbolical representation of the papal power), had most probably its commencement in a.d. 755 or 756, when Pepin, king of France, invested the pope with temporal power. This hypothesis will bring the conclusion of the period to about the year of Christ 2000, a time fixed by Jews and Christians for some remarkable revolution; when the world, as they suppose, will be renewed, the wicked cease from troubling the Church, and the saints of the Most High have dominion over the whole habitable globe. But this is all hypothesis.

The thrones were cast down - דמיו might be translated erected, so the Vulgate, positi sunt, and so all the versions; but that ours is a proper translation, is sufficiently evident from Dan 3:6, Dan 3:16, Dan 3:20; Dan 6:17, etc.; where the original word can be used in no other sense than that of throwing or casting down. There is a reference here to preparations made for a general assize, or to the convocation of the sanhedrin, where the father of the consistory sat with his assessors on each side in the form of a semicircle, and the people stood before them. The Ancient of days - God Almighty; and this is the only place in the sacred writings where God the Father is represented in a human form.

VISION OF THE FOUR BEASTS. (Dan. 7:1-28) Belshazzar--Good Hebrew manuscripts have "Belshazzar"; meaning "Bel is to be burnt with hostile fire" (Jer 50:2; Jer 51:44). In the history he is called by his ordinary name; in the prophecy, which gives his true destiny, he is called a corresponding name, by the change of a letter. visions of his head--not confused "dreams," but distinct images seen while his mind was collected. sum--a "summary." In predictions, generally, details are not given so fully as to leave no scope for free agency, faith, and patient waiting for God manifesting His will in the event. He "wrote" it for the Church in all ages; he "told" it for the comfort of his captive fellow countrymen.

I beheld till--I continued looking till. thrones . . . cast down--rather, "thrones were placed" [Vulgate and LUTHER], namely, for the saints and elect angels to whom "judgment is given" (Dan 7:22), as assessors with the Judge. Compare Dan 7:10, "thousand thousands ministered unto Him" (Mat 19:28; Luk 22:30; Co1 6:2-3; Ti1 5:21; Rev 2:26; Rev 4:4). In English Version the thrones cast down are those of the previously mentioned kings who give place to Messiah. Ancient of days--"The everlasting Father" (Isa 9:6). HE is the Judge here, as THE SON does not judge in His own cause, and it is His cause which is the one at issue with Antichrist. sit--the attitude of a judge about to pass sentence. white--The judicial purity of the Judge, and of all things round Him, is hereby expressed (Rev 1:14). wheels--as Oriental thrones move on wheels. Like the rapid flame, God's judgments are most swift in falling where He wills them (Eze 1:15-16). The judgment here is not the last judgment, for then there will be no beast, and heaven and earth shall have passed away; but it is that on Antichrist (the last development of the fourth kingdom), typical of the last judgment: Christ coming to substitute the millennial kingdom of glory for that of the cross (Rev 17:12-14; Rev 19:15-21; Rev 11:15).

The Vision of the Four World-Kingdoms; the Judgment; and the Kingdom of the Holy God After presenting to view (Daniel 3-6) in concrete delineation, partly in the prophetically significant experiences of Daniel and his friends, and partly in the typical events which befell the world-rulers, the position and conduct of the representatives of the world-power in relation to the worshippers of the living God, there follows in this chapter the record of a vision seen by Daniel in the first year of Belshazzar. In this vision the four world-monarchies which were shown to Nebuchadnezzar in a dream in the form of an image are represented under the symbol of beasts; and there is a further unfolding not only of the nature and character of the four successive world-kingdoms, but also of the everlasting kingdom of God established by the judgment of the world-kingdoms. With this vision, recorded like the preceding chapters in the Chaldean language, the first part of this work, treating of the development of the world-power in its four principal forms, is brought to a conclusion suitable to its form and contents. This chapter is divided, according to its contents, into two equal portions. Dan 7:1-14 contain the vision, and Dan 7:15-28 its interpretation. After an historical introduction it is narrated how Daniel saw (Dan 7:2-8) four great beasts rise up one after another out of the storm-tossed sea; then the judgment of God against the fourth beast and the other beasts (Dan 7:9-12); and finally (Dan 7:13, Dan 7:14), the delivering up of the kingdom over all nations to the Son of man, who came with the clouds of heaven. Being deeply moved (Dan 7:15) by what he saw, the import of the vision is first made known to him in general by an angel (Dan 7:16-18), and then more particularly by the judgment (Dan 7:19-26) against the fourth beast, and its destruction, and by the setting up of the kingdom of the saints of the Most High (Dan 7:27). The narrative of the vision is brought to a close by a statement of the impression made by this divine revelation on the mind of the prophet (Dan 7:28). (Note: According to the modern critics, this vision also is to be regarded as belonging to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes; and, as von Lengerke says, the representation of the Messianic kingdom (Dan 7:13 and Dan 7:14) is the only prophetic portion of it, all the other parts merely announcing what had already occurred. According to Hitzig, this dream-vision must have been composed (cf. Dan 7:25, Dan 8:14) shortly before the consecration of the temple (1 Macc. 4:52, 59). On the other hand, Kranichfeld remarks, that if this chapter were composed during the time of the persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes, "then it would show that its author was in the greatest ignorance as to the principal historical dates of his own time;" and he adduces in illustration the date in Dan 7:25, and the failure of the attempts of the opponents of its genuineness to authenticate in history the ten horns which grew up before the eleventh horn, and the three kingdoms (Dan 7:7., 20). According to Dan 7:25, the blaspheming of the Most High, the wearing out of the saints, and the changing of all religious ordinances continue for three and a half times, which are taken for three and a half years, after the expiry of which an end will be made, by means of the judgment, to the heathen oppression. But these three and a half years are not historically proved to be the period of the religious persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes. "In both of the books of the Maccabees (1 Macc. 1:54; 2 Macc. 10:5) the period of the desecration of the temple (according to v. Leng.) lasted only three years; and Josephus, Ant. xii. 7. 6, speaks also of three years, reckoning from the year 145 Seleucid. and the 25th day of the month Kisleu, when the first burnt-offering was offered on the idol-altar (1 Macc. 1:57), to the 25th day of Kisleu in the year 148 Seleucid., when for the first time sacrifice was offered (1 Macc. 4:52) on the newly erected altar." But since the βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως was, according to 1 Macc. 1:54, erected on the 15th day of Kisleu in the year 145 Seleucid., ten days before the first offering of sacrifice upon it, most reckon from the 15th Kisleu, and thus make the period three years and ten days. Hitzig seeks to gain a quarter of a year more by going back in his reckoning to the arrival in Judea (1 Macc. 1:29, cf. 2 Macc. 5:24) of the chief collector of tribute sent by Apollonius. C. von Lengerke thinks that the period of three and a half years cannot be reckoned with historical accuracy. Hilgenfeld would reckon the commencement of this period from some other event in relation to the temple, which, however, has not been recorded in history. - From all this it is clear as noonday that the three and a half years are not historically identified, and thus that the Maccabean pseudo-Daniel was ignorant of the principal events of his time. Just as little are these critics able historically to identify the ten kings (Dan 7:7 and Dan 7:20), as we shall show in an Excursus on the four world-kingdoms at the close of this chapter.) Appendix to Daniel 1-7 The Four World-Kingdoms There yet remains for our consideration the question, What are the historical world-kingdoms which are represented by Nebuchadnezzar's image (Daniel 2), and by Daniel's vision of four beasts rising up out of the sea? Almost all interpreters understand that these two vision are to be interpreted in the same way. "The four kingdoms or dynasties, which were symbolized (Daniel 2) by the different parts of the human image, from the head to the feet, are the same as those which were symbolized by the four great beasts rising up out of the sea." This is the view not only of Bleek, who herein agrees with Auberlen, but also of Kranichfeld and Kliefoth, and all church interpreters. These four kingdoms, according to the interpretation commonly received in the church, are the Babylonian, the Medo-Persian, the Macedo-Grecian, and the Roman. "In this interpretation and opinion," Luther observes, "all the world are agreed, and history and fact abundantly establish it." This opinion prevailed till about the end of the last century, for the contrary opinion of individual earlier interprets had found no favour. (Note: This is true regarding the opinion of Ephrem Syrus and of Cosmas Indicopleustes, who held that the second kingdom was the Median, the third the Persian, and the fourth the kingdom of Alexander and his successors. This view has been adopted only by an anonymous writer in the Comment. Var. in Dan. in Mai's Collectio nov. Script. Vett. p. 176. The same thing may be said of the opinion of Polychronius and Grotius, that the second kingdom was the Medo-Persian, the third the monarchy of Alexander, and the fourth the kingdom of his followers - a view which has found only one weak advocate in J. Chr. Becmann in a dissert. de Monarchia Quarta, Franc. ad Od. 1671.) But from that time, when faith in the supernatural origin and character of biblical prophecy was shaken by Deism and Rationalism, then as a consequence, with the rejection of the genuineness of the book of Daniel the reference of the fourth kingdom to the Roman world-monarchy was also denied. For the pseudo-Daniel of the times of the Maccabees could furnish no prophecy which could reach further than the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. If the reference of the fourth kingdom to the Roman empire was therefore a priori excluded, the four kingdoms must be so explained that the pretended prophecy should not extend further than to the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. For this end all probabilities were created, and yet nothing further was reached than that one critic confuted another. While Ewald and Bunsen advanced the opinion that the Assyrian kingdom is specially to be understood by the first kingdom, and that the Maccabean author of the book was first compelled by the reference to Nebuchadnezzar to separate, in opposition to history, the Median from the Persian kingdom, so as to preserve the number four, Hitzig, in agreement with von Redepenning, has sought to divide the Babylonian kingdom, and to refer the first kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar and the second to his successor Belshazzar; while Bertholdt, Jahn, and Rosenmller, with Grotius, have divided the kingdom of Alexander from the kingdom of his successors. But as both of these divisions appear to be altogether too arbitrary, Venema, Bleek, de Wette, Lcke, v. Leng., Maurer, Hitzig (Daniel vii.), Hilgenfeld, and Kranichfeld have disjoined the Medo-Persian monarchy into two world-kingdoms, the Median and the Persian, and in this they are followed by Delitzsch. See Art. Daniel in Herz.'s Real Encyc. When we examine these views more closely, the first named is confuted by what Ewald himself (Die Proph. iii. 314) has said on this point. The four world-kingdoms "must follow each other strictly in chronological order, the succeeding being always inferior, sterner, and more reckless than that which went before. They thus appear in the gigantic image (Daniel 2), which in its four parts, from head to feet, is formed of altogether different materials; in like manner in Daniel 7 four different beasts successively appear on the scene, the one of which, according to Daniel 8, always destroys the other. Now it cannot be said, indeed, in strict historical fact that the Chaldean kingdom first gave way to the Median, and this again to the Persian, but, as it is always said, the Persian and Median together under Cyrus overthrew the Chaldean and formed one kingdom. This is stated by the author himself in Daniel 8, where the Medo-Persian kingdom is presented as one under the image of a two-horned ram. According to this, he should have reckoned from Nabucodrossor only three world-kingdoms, if he had not received the number of four world-kingdoms from an old prophet living under the Assyrian dominion, who understood by the four kingdoms the Assyrian, the Chaldean, the Medo-Persian, and the Grecian. Since now this number, it is self-evident to him, can neither be increased nor diminished, there remained nothing else for him than to separate the Median from the Persian kingdom at that point where he rendered directly prominent the order and the number four, while he at other times views them together." But what then made it necessary for this pseudo-prophet to interpret the golden head of Nebuchadnezzar, and to entangle himself thereby, in opposition not only to the history, but also to his own better judgment, Daniel 8, if in the old sources used by him the Assyrian is to be understood as the first kingdom? To this manifest objection Ewald has given no answer, and has not shown that in Daniel 2 and 7 the Median kingdom is separated from the Persian. Thus this hypothesis is destitute of every foundation, and the derivation of the number four for the world-kingdoms from a prophetic book of the Assyrian period is one of the groundless ideas with which Ewald thinks to enrich biblical literature. Hitzig's opinion, that Daniel had derived the idea of separating the heathen power into four kingdoms following each other from the representation of the four ages of the world, has no better foundation. It was natural for him to represent Assyria as the first kingdom, yet as he wished not to refer to the past, but to future, he could only begin with the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar. Regarding himself as bound to the number four, he divided on that account, in Daniel 2, the Chaldean dominion into two periods, and in Daniel 7, for the same reason, the Medo-Persian into two kingdoms, the Median and the Persian. This view Hitzig founds partly on this, that in Dan 2:38 not the Chaldean kingdom but Nebuchadnezzar is designated as the golden head, and that for Daniel there exist only two Chaldean kings; and partly on this, that the second מלכוּ (Dan 2:39) is named as inferior to the Chaldean, which could not be said of the Medo-Persian as compared with the Chaldean; and, finally, partly on this, that in the vision seen in the first year of Belshazzar (Daniel 7), Nebuchadnezzar already belonged to the past, while according to Dan 7:17 the first kingdom was yet future. But apart from the incorrectness of the assertion, that for the author of this book only two Chaldean kings existed, it does not follow from the circumstance that Nebuchadnezzar is styled the golden head of the image, that he personally is meant as distinct from the Chaldean king that succeeded him; on the contrary, that Nebuchadnezzar comes to view only as the founder, and at that time the actual ruler, of the kingdom, is clear from Dan 2:39, "after thee shall arise another kingdom" (מלכוּ), not another king (מלך), as it ought to be read, according to Hitzig's opinion. Belshazzar did not found another kingdom, or, as Hitzig says, another dominion (Herschaft), but he only continued the kingdom or dominion of Nebuchadnezzar. The two other reasons advanced have been already disposed of in the interpretation of Dan 2:39 and of Dan 7:17. The expression, "inferior to thee" (Dan 2:39), would not relate to the Medo-Persian kingdom as compared with the Chaldean only if it referred to the geographical extension of the kingdom, which is not the case. And the argument deduced from the words "shall arise" in Dan 7:17 proves too much, and therefore nothing. If in the word יקוּמוּן (shall arise) it be held that the first kingdom was yet to arise, then also the dominion of Belshazzar would be thereby excluded, which existed at the time of that vision. Moreover the supposition that מלכוּ means in Dan 2:39 the government of an individual king, but in Dan 2:4 a kingdom, the passages being parallel in their contents and in their form, and that מלכין in Dan 7:17 ("the four beasts are four kings") means, when applied to the first two beasts, separate kings, and when applied to the two last, kingdoms, violates all the rules of hermeneutics. "Two rulers personally cannot possibly be placed in the same category with two kingdoms" (Kliefoth). But the view of Bertholdt, that the third kingdom represents the monarchy of Alexander, and the fourth that of his διάδοχοι (successors), is at the present day generally abandoned. And there is good reason that it should be so; for it is plain that the description of the iron nature of the fourth kingdom in Daniel 2 breaking all things in pieces, as well as of the terribleness of the fourth beast in Daniel 7, by no means agrees with the kingdoms of the successors of Alexander, which in point of might and greatness were far inferior to the monarchy of Alexander, as is indeed expressly stated in Dan 11:4. Hitzig has, moreover, justly remarked, on the other hand, that "for the author of this book the kingdom of Alexander and that of his successors form together the יון מלכוּת, Dan 8:21 (the kingdom of Javan = Grecia). But if he had separated them, he could not have spoken of the kingdom of the successors as 'diverse' in character from that of Alexander, Dan 7:7, Dan 7:19. Finally, by such a view a right interpretation of the four heads, Dan 7:6, and the special meaning of the legs which were wholly of iron, Dan 2:33, is lost." Now, since the untenableness of these three suppositions is obvious, there only remains the expedient to divide the Medo-Persian world-kingdom into a Median and a Persian kingdom, and to combine the former with the second and the latter with the third of Daniel's kingdoms. But this scheme also is broken to pieces by the twofold circumstance, (1) that, as Maurer himself acknowledges, history knows nothing whatever of a Median world-kingdom; and (2) that, as Kranichfeld is compelled to confess (p. 122ff.), "it cannot be proved from Dan 5:28; Dan 7:1, 29; Dan 9:1; Dan 11:1, that the author of the book, in the vision in Daniel 2 or 7, or at all, conceived of an exclusively Median world-kingdom, and knew nothing of the Persian race as an inner component part of this kingdom." It is true the book of Daniel, according to Daniel 8, recognises a distinction between a Median and a Persian dynasty (cf. Dan 8:3), but in other respects it recognises only one kingdom, which comprehends in its unity the Median and the Persian race. In harmony with this, the author speaks, at the time when the Median government over Babylon was actually in existence, only of one law of the kingdom for Medes and Persians (Dan 6:9, Dan 6:13, Dan 6:16), i.e., one law which rested on a common agreement of the two nations bound together into one kingdom. "The author of this book, who at the time of Darius, king of the Medes, knew only of one kingdom common to both races," according to Kran., "speaks also in the preceding period of the Chaldean independence of the Medes only in conjunction with the Persians (cf. Dan 5:28; Dan 8:20), and, after the analogy of the remark already made, not as of two separated kingdoms, but in the sense of one kingdom, comprehending in it, along with the Median race, also the Persians as another and an important component part. This finds its ratification during the independence of Babylon even in Dan 8:20; for there the kings of the Medes and the Persians are represented by one beast, although at the same time two separate dynasties are in view. This actual fact of a national union into one kingdom very naturally and fully explains why, in the case of Cyrus, as well as in that of Darius, the national origin of the governors, emphatically set forth, was of interest for the author (cf. Dan 9:1; Dan 6:1; Dan 11:1; Dan 6:28), while with regard to the Chaldean kings there is no similar particular notice taken of their origin; and generally, instead of a statement of the personal descent of Darius and Cyrus, much rather only a direct mention of the particular people ruled by each - e.g., for these rulers the special designations 'king of the Persians,' 'king of the Medes'-was to be expected (Note: Kranichfeld goes on to say, that Hilgenfeld goes too far if he concludes from the attribute, the Mede (Dan 6:1 Dan 5:31), that the author wished to represent thereby a separate kingdom of the Medes in opposition to a kingdom of the Persians at a later time nationally distinct from it; further, that as in the sequel the Median dynasty of the Medo-Persian kingdom passed over into a Persian dynasty, and through the government of the Persian Cyrus the Persian race naturally came forth into the foreground and assumed a prominent place, the kingdom was designated a potiori as that of the Persians (Dan 10:1, Dan 10:13, Dan 10:20; Dan 11:2), like as, in other circumstances (Isa 13:17; Jer 51:11, Jer 51:28), the Medians alone are a potiori represented as the destroyers of Babylon. "As there was, during the flourishing period of the Median dynasty, a kingdom of the Medes and Persians (cf. Dan 5:28; Dan 8:20), so there is, since the time of Cyrus the Persian, a kingdom of the Persians and Medes (cf. Est 1:3, Est 1:18, 1 Macc. 1:1; 14:2). We find in Daniel, at the time of the Median supremacy in the kingdom, the law of the Medes and Persians (Dan 6:9, Dan 6:13, Dan 6:16), and subsequently we naturally find the law of the Persians and Medes, Est 1:19.") (cf. Dan 8:20; Dan 10:1, Dan 10:13, Dan 10:20; Dan 11:2)." Hence, as Kranichfeld further rightly judges, it could not (Daniel 8) appear appropriate to suppose that the author had Persian in view as the third kingdom, while in the visions Daniel 2 and 7 we would regard Persian as a kingdom altogether separated from the Median kingdom. Moreover the author in Daniel 8 speaks of the one horn of the ram as growing up after the other, in order thereby to indicate the growing up of the Persian dynasty after the Median, and consequently the two dynasties together in one and the same kingdom (Dan 8:3, cf. Dan 8:20). Yet, in spite of all these testimonies to the contrary, Daniel must in Daniel 2 and 7 have had in view by the second world-kingdom the Median, and by the third the Persian, because at that time he did not think that in the relation of the Median and the Persian no other change in the future would happen than a simple change of dynasty, but because, at the time in which the Median kingdom stood in a threatening attitude toward the Chaldean (both in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar and in the first year of his son Belshazzar, i.e., Evilmerodach), he thought that a sovereign Persian kingdom would rise up victoriously opposite the Median rival of Nebuchadnezzar. As opposed to this expedient, we will not insist on the improbability that Daniel within two years should have wholly changed his opinion as to the relation between the Medians and the Persians, though it would be difficult to find a valid ground for this. Nor shall we lay any stress on this consideration, that the assumed error of the prophet regarding the contents of the divine revelation in Daniel 2 and 7 appears irreconcilable with the supernatural illumination of Daniel, because Kranichfeld regards the prophetic statements as only the produce of enlightened human mental culture. But we must closely examine the question how this reference of the world-kingdoms spoken of stands related to the characteristics of the third and fourth kingdoms as stated in Daniel 2 and 7. The description of the second and third kingdoms is very briefly given in Daniel 2 and 7. Even though the statement, Dan 2:39, that the second kingdom would be smaller than the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar could point to a Median kingdom, and the statement that the third kingdom would rule over the whole earth might refer to the spread of the dominion of the Persians beyond the boundaries of the Chaldean and Medo-Persian kingdom under Darius, yet the description of both of these kingdoms in Dan 7:5 sufficiently shows the untenableness of this interpretation. The second kingdom is represented under the image of a bear, which raises itself up on one side, and has three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. The three ribs in its mouth the advocates of this view do not know how to interpret. According to Kran., they are to be regarded as pointing out constituent parts of a whole, of an older kingdom, which he does not attempt more definitely to describe, because history records nothing of the conquests which Darius the Mede may have gained during the two years of his reign after the conquest of Babylon and the overthrow of the Chaldean kingdom by Cyrus. And the leopard representing (Dan 7:6) the third kingdom has not only four wings, but also four heads. The four heads show beyond a doubt the vision of the kingdom represented by the leopard into four kingdoms, just as in Daniel 8 the four horns of the he-goat, which in Dan 8:22 are expressly interpreted of four kingdoms rising out of the kingdom of Javan. But a division into four kingdoms cannot by any means be proved of the Persian world-kingdom. Therefore the four heads must here, according to Kran., represent only the vigilant watchfulness and aggression over all the regions of the earth, the pushing movement toward the different regions of the heavens, or, according to Hitzig, the four kings of Persia whom alone Daniel knew. But the first of these interpretations confutes itself, since heads are never the symbol of watchfulness or of aggressive power; and the second is set aside by a comparison with Dan 8:22. If the four horns of the he-goat represent four world-kingdoms rising up together, then the four heads of the leopard can never represent four kings reigning after one another, even though it were the case, which it is not (Dan 11:2), that Daniel knew only four kings of Persia. Yet more incompatible are the statements regarding the fourth world-kingdom in Daniel 2 and 7 with the supposition that the kingdom of Alexander and his followers is to be understood by it. Neither the monarchy of Alexander nor the Javanic world-kingdom accords with the iron nature of the fourth kingdom, represented by the legs of iron, breaking all things in pieces, nor with the internal division of this kingdom, represented by the feet consisting partly of iron and partly of clay, nor finally with the ten toes formed of iron and clay mixed (Dan 2:33, Dan 2:40-43). As little does the monarchy of Alexander and his successors resemble a fearful beast with ten horns, which was without any representative in the animal world, according to which Daniel could have named it (Dan 7:7, Dan 7:19). Kranichfeld rejects, therefore, the historical meaning of the image in Daniel 2, and seeks to interpret its separate features only as the expression of the irreparable division of the ungodly kingdom assailing the theocracy with destructive vehemence, and therein of dependent weakness and inner dissolution. Hitzig finds in the two legs the representation of a monarchy which, as the Greek domination, sets its one foot on Europe and its other on Asia; and he regards Syria and Egypt as the material of it - Syria as the iron, Egypt as the clay. Others, again, regard the feet as the kingdoms of the Seleucidae and the Ptolemies, and in the ten horns they seek the other kingdoms of the Διάδοχοι. On the other hand, Kliefoth justly asks, "How came Syria and Egypt to be feet? And the toes go out of the feet, but the other kingdoms of the Διάδοχοι do not arise out of Syria and Egypt." And if in this circumstance, that it is said of the fourth terrible beast that it was different from all the beasts that went before, and that no likeness was found for it among the beasts of prey, Kran. only finds it declared "that it puts forth its whole peculiarity according to its power in such a way that no name can any longer be found for it," then this in no respect whatever agrees with the monarchy of Alexander. According to Hitz., the difference of the fourth beast is to be sought in the monarchy of Alexander transplanted from Europe into Asia, as over against the three monarchies, which shared in common an oriental home, a different kind of culture, and a despotic government. But was the transference of a European monarchy and culture into Asia something so fearful that Daniel could find no name whereby to represent the terribleness of this beast? The relation of Alexander to the Jews in no respect corresponds to this representation; and in Daniel 8 Daniel does not say a word about the rapidity of its conquests. He had thus an entirely different conception of the Greek monarchy from that of his modern interpreters. Finally, if we take into consideration that the terrible beast which represents the fourth world-power has ten horns (Dan 7:7), which is to be explained as denoting that out of the same kingdom ten kings shall arise (Dan 7:24), and, on the contrary, that by the breaking off from the he-goat, representing the monarchy of Alexander, of the one great horn, which signified the first king, and the subsequent springing up of four similar horns, is to be understood that four kingdoms shall arise out of it (Dan 8:5, Dan 8:8,Dan 8:21-22); then the difference of the number of the horns shows that the beast with the ten horns cannot represent the same kingdom as that which is represented by the he-goat with four horns, since the number four is neither according to its numerical nor its symbolical meaning identical with the number ten. Moreover, this identifying of the two is quite set aside by the impossibility of interpreting the ten horns historically. Giving weight to the explanation of the angel, that the ten horns represent the rising up of ten kings, Berth., v. Leng., Hitz., and Del. have endeavoured to find these kings among the Seleucidae, but they have not been able to discover more than seven: 1. Seleucus Nicator; 2. Antiochus Soter; 3. Antiochus Theus; 4. Seleucus Callinicus; 5. Seleuchus Ceraunus; 6. Antiochus the Great; 7. Seleucus Philopator, the brother and predecessor of Antiochus Epiphanes, who after Philopator's death mounted the throne of Syria, having set aside other heirs who had a better title to it, and who must be that little horn which reached the kingdom by the rooting up of three kings. The three kings whom Antiochus plucked up by the roots (cf. Dan 7:8, Dan 7:20,Dan 7:24) must be Heliodorus, the murderer of Philopator; Demetrius, who was a hostage in Rome, the son of Philopator, and the legitimate successor to the throne; and the son of Ptolemy Philometor, for whom his mother Cleopatra, the sister of Seleucus Philopator and of Antiochus Epiphanes, claimed the Syrian throne. But no one of these three reached the royal dignity, and none of them was dethroned or plucked up by the roots by Antiochus Epiphanes. Heliodorus, it is true, strove for the kingdom (Appian, Syriac. 45); but his efforts were defeated, yet not by Antiochus Epiphanes, but by Attalus and Eumenes. Demetrius, after his death, was the legitimate heir to the throne, but could not assert his rights, because he was a hostage in Rome; and since he did not at all mount the throne, he was not of course dethroned by his uncle Antiochus Epiphanes. Finally, Ptolemy Philometor, after the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, for a short time, it is true, united the Syrian crown with the Egyptian (1 Macc. 11:13; Polyb. 40:12), but during the life of Antiochus Epiphanes, and before he ascended the throne, he was neither de jure nor de facto king of Syria; and the "pretended efforts of Cleopatra to gain for her son Philometor the crown of Syria are nowhere proved" (Hitzig). Of this historical interpretation we cannot thus say even so much as that it "only very scantily meets the case" (Delitzsch); for it does not at all accord with the prophecy that the little horn (Antiochus Epiphanes) plucked up by the roots three of the existing kings. Hitzig and Hilgenfeld (Die Proph. Esra u. Daniel p. 82) have therefore dropped out of view the Syrian kingdom of Philometor, and, in order to gain the number ten, have ranked Alexander the Great among the Syrian kings, and taken Seleucus Philopator into the triad of the pretended Syrian kings that were plucked up by the roots by Antiochus Epiphanes. But Alexander the Great can neither according to the evidence of history, nor according to the statement of the book of Daniel, be counted among the kings of Syria; and Seleucus Philopator was not murdered by Antiochus Epiphanes, but Antiochus Epiphanes lived at the time of this deed in Athens (Appian, Syr. 45); and the murderer Heliodorus cannot have accomplished that crime as the instrument of Antiochus, because he aspired to gain the throne for himself, and was only prevented from doing so by the intervention of Attalus and Eumenes. Hilgenfeld also does not venture to reckon Heliodorus, the murderer of the king, among the triad of uprooted kings, but seeks to supply his place by an older son of Seleucus Philopator, murdered at the instigation of Antiochus Epiphanes according to Gutschmid; but he fails to observe that a king's son murdered during the lifetime of his father, reigning as king, could not possibly be represented as a king whom Antiochus Epiphanes drove from his throne. Of the ten kings of the Grecian world-kingdom of the branch of the Seleucidae before Antiochus Epiphanes, whom Hilgenfeld believes that he is almost able "to grasp with his hands," history gives as little information as of the uprooting of the three Syrian kings by Antiochus Epiphanes. But even though the historical relevancy of the attempt to authenticate the ten Syrian kings in the kingdom of the Seleucidae were more satisfactory than, from what has been remarked, appears to be the case, yet this interpretation of the fourth beast would be shattered against the ten horns, because these horns did not grow up one after another, but are found simultaneously on the head of the beast, and consequently cannot mean ten Syrian kings following one another, as not only all interpreters who regard the beast as representing the Roman empire, but also Bell. and Kran., acknowledge, in spite of the reference of this beast to the Javanic world-kingdom. "We are induced," as Bleek justly observes, "by Dan 7:8, where it is said of the little horn that it would rise up between the ten horns, to think of ten contemporaneous kings, or rather kingdoms, existing along with each other, which rise out of the fourth kingdom." Therefore he will "not deny that the reference to the successors of Alexander is rendered obscure by the fact that Daniel 8 speaks of four monarchies which arise out of that of Alexander after his death." This obscurity, however, he thinks he is able to clear up by the remark, that "in the kind of development of the historical relations after the death of Alexander, the parts of his kingdom which formed themselves int

The judgment on the horn speaking great things and on the other beasts, and the delivering of the kingdom to the Son of Man. After Daniel had for a while contemplated the rising up of the little horn that appeared among the ten horns, the scene changed. There is a solemn sitting in judgment by God, and sentence is pronounced. Seats or chairs were placed. רמיו, activ. with an indefinite subject: they were thrown, i.e., they were placed in order quickly, or with a noise. Seats, not merely a throne for God the Judge, but a number of seats for the assembly sitting in judgment with God. That assembly consists neither of the elders of Israel (Rabb.), nor of glorified men (Hengstb. on Rev 4:4), but of angels (Psa 89:8), who are to be distinguished from the thousands and tens of thousands mentioned in Dan 7:10; for these do not sit upon thrones, but stand before God as servants to fulfil His commands and execute His judgments. יומין עתּיק, one advanced in days, very old, is not the Eternal; for although God is meant, yet Daniel does not see the everlasting God, but an old man, or a man of grey hairs, in whose majestic from God makes Himself visible (cf. Eze 1:26). When Daniel represents the true God as an aged man, he does so not in contrast with the recent gods of the heathen which Antiochus Epiphanes wished to introduce, or specially with reference to new gods, as Hitzig and Kran. suppose, by reference to Deu 32:17 and Jer 23:23; for God is not called the old God, but appears only as an old man, because age inspires veneration and conveys the impression of majesty. This impression is heightened by the robe with which He is covered, and by the appearance of the hair of His head, and also by the flames of fire which are seen to go forth from His throne. His robe is white as snow, and the hair of His head is white like pure wool; cf. Rev 1:14. Both are symbols of spotless purity and holiness. Flames of fire proceed from His throne as if it consisted of it, and the wheels of His throne scatter forth fire. One must not take the fire exclusively as a sign of punishment. Fire and the shining of fire are the constant phenomena of the manifestation of God in the world, as the earthly elements most fitting for the representation of the burning zeal with which the holy God not only punishes and destroys sinners, but also purifies and renders glorious His own people; see under Exo 3:3. The fire-scattering wheels of the throne show the omnipresence of the divine throne of judgment, the going of the judgment of God over the whole earth (Kliefoth). The fire which engirds with flame the throne of God pours itself forth as a stream from God into the world, consuming all that is sinful and hostile to God in the world, and rendering the people and kingdom of God glorious. קדמוהי מן (from before Him) refers to God, and not to His throne. A thousand times a thousand and ten thousand times ten thousand are hyperbolical expressions for an innumerable company of angels, who as His servants stand around God; cf. Deu 33:2; Psa 68:18. The Keri presents the Chaldaic form אלפין for the Hebraizing form of the text אלפים (thousands), and for רבון the Hebraizing form רבבן (myriads), often found in the Targg., to harmonize the plur. form with the singular רבּו going before. Forthwith the judgment begins. יתב דּינא we translate, with most interpreters, the judgment sets itself. דּינא, judgment, abstr. pro concreto, as judicium in Cicero, Verr. 2. 18. This idea alone is admissible in Dan 7:26, and here also it is more simple than that defended by Dathe and Kran.: "He" (i.e., the Ancient of days) "sets Himself for judgment," - which would form a pure tautology, since His placing Himself for judgment has been already (Dan 7:9) mentioned, and nothing would be said regarding the object for which the throne was set. - "The books were opened." The actions of men are recorded in the books, according to which they are judged, some being ordained to eternal life and others condemned to eternal death; cf. Rev 20:12, and the notes under Dan 12:1. The horn speaking great things is first visited with the sentence of death.