How To Know There Are 5 Beast Kingdoms in Daniel

[Randy Kluth]

I'm not angry, that is your false assumption you made up just because I won't play ball with your false seminary doctrine 'toys'.

And you have not disagreed with me. You haven't even begun... to address the Daniel 2 verses I quoted, so how could you possibly agree or disagree when you haven't bothered to even look at them and comment on those?

The more you bear false witness against me in trying to attack my credibility, the more you make yourself look like a fool.

Why are you calling my opinions "false seminary doctrine toys?" Aren't you trying to be provocative in this? That's why I asked why you're angry.

I'm quite willing to discuss the full gamut of your beliefs about Dan 2. That wasn't my point--I was just dealing with the number 4. Why didn't the passage provide the number 5?

I'm not bearing false witness against you, nor attacking your credibility. I was just disagreeing with you.

Is that how you define "bearing false witness?" If so, you are indeed stretching credulity!

But I'm not challenging your credibility. I'm just questioning your definition of the term "false witness." It is not defined as "having a different opinion."

 

[Davy]

Indeed there are 5, but Daniel 7 shows us this even more so than Dan. ch. 2. Meanwhile I agree, Dan. 2 shows 5 Beasts, but Dan. 7 SPECIFIES that the Last Beast is different than First Beast and it is not speaking about Babylon. Lets look at Dan. 2 first. We have Gold (Babylon) Silver (Persia), Brass (Greece), Iron (Rome) AND (Iron & Clay) The Anti-Christ or Little Horn who is born amongst the 10 (Complete Europe), and what happened to the Roman Empire ?....

With you last sentence that is where that doctrine you mention starts to fall apart.

Revelation 17 reveals the idea of the beast king, and the ten horns which are ten kings, to appear concurrently for the very end of this world, not... back in history.

The "little horn" of Daniel 7 represents the "dragon" or beast king idea in Revelation for the very end of this world, the generation that will see Christ's future return.

 

[Davy]

Hi Davy,

Well done. At last, someone with some sense. For too long the RRE error has clouded people`s understanding. So glad you are seeing the 5 parts of the Great Image.

Marilyn.

I missed it for a long time, having been focused hard on the Daniel 7 idea of 'four' beasts.

 

[Davy]

Do you think Jerusalem has already done her worst she was Gods but she then whored herself out to Rome and then rejected and killed her God and messiah? What more could she do it was so bad that God judged her and destroyed
her?

Oh no, the worst is still yet to come for Jerusalem at the end, as the Babylon Harlot city.

Lord Jesus and even Apostle Paul, revealed the coming false one to Jerusalem for the end is going to be Lucifer himself, and not some flesh born man. Revelation 11 even reveals it's the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit that will kill God's two witnesses in Jerusalem in final, and leave their dead bodies laying in the street for three and one half days. Just what kind of entity 'ascends' out of the bottomless pit? Who did Revelation 9 reveal that is the angel king over the bottomless pit? What did John mean in Revelation 13:4-8 when he said the 'whole world' will 'worship' the "dragon"? Who did he show in Revelation 12:9 that is that "dragon"?

I mean, what does it take for Christ's servants to stop listening to men's doctrines served by the devil's workers that have crept in, and instead turn to Christ's Word in simplicity, and believe... what it says??? Why else does one think Lord Jesus gave us His Book of Revelation, which means 'the revealing'?

 

[Ronald D Milam]

With you last sentence that is where that doctrine you mention starts to fall apart.

Revelation 17 reveals the idea of the beast king, and the ten horns which are ten kings, to appear concurrently for the very end of this world, not... back in history.

The "little horn" of Daniel 7 represents the "dragon" or beast king idea in Revelation for the very end of this world, the generation that will see Christ's future return.

The Rev. 17, 10 Kings, are indeed END TIME. The Little Horn however is the Anti-Christ.

 

[Davy]

Why are you calling my opinions "false seminary doctrine toys?" Aren't you trying to be provocative in this? That's why I asked why you're angry.

You are so.... funny! I don't buy your hurt puppy behavior at all!

The 'toys' I refer to are the men's doctrines YOU ARE ON that WON'T EVEN BOTHER TO ADDRESS THE DANIEL 2 SCRIPTURES I QUOTED! NOW, HAVE YOU GOT THAT? SEEING THAT YOU ARE HARD OF HEARING!

And you can be self-provoked all you want. You do not SCARE ME ONE SINGLE BIT! You must really think you're something!

 

[Davy]

The Rev. 17, 10 Kings, are indeed END TIME. The Little Horn however is the Anti-Christ.

Who is the Antichrist?

Per my Bible, it is Lucifer himself.

The word "antichrist" in the Greek comes from 2 Greek words, 'anti' which can mean 'in place of', and 'christos' which is singular for Christ. So the direct meaning from Greek to English actually is... the 'in place of Christ'.

Who was it that first rebelled in wanting to sit in God's Place, and even claimed that he would become like The Most High? (and that includes Christ's Place).

How is it that so many Christian brethren have either never learned, or have forgotten the ancient event of Satan's rebellion that caused God to bring this present word in order to offer up His Son on the cross as our Savior and Redeemer? God is going to allow Lucifer to come to OUR world for the very end, and play The Christ, even with the full load of great signs, wonders, and miracles to fool the whole world with! And because so many people today are totally wrapped up in their flesh and material lusts, when they see Lucifer work those miracles here on earth at the end, in plain sight, they will fall in line to him like all those little school girls did when the Beatles and Elvis Pressley got up on stage and did a little shakin'.

 

[covenantee]

Who is the Antichrist?

Per my Bible, it is Lucifer himself.

The word "antichrist" in the Greek comes from 2 Greek words, 'anti' which can mean 'in place of', and 'christos' which is singular for Christ. So the direct meaning from Greek to English actually is... the 'in place of Christ'.

Who was it that first rebelled in wanting to sit in God's Place, and even claimed that he would become like The Most High? (and that includes Christ's Place).

How is it that so many Christian brethren have either never learned, or have forgotten the ancient event of Satan's rebellion that caused God to bring this present word in order to offer up His Son on the cross as our Savior and Redeemer? God is going to allow Lucifer to come to OUR world for the very end, and play The Christ, even with the full load of great signs, wonders, and miracles to fool the whole world with! And because so many people today are totally wrapped up in their flesh and material lusts, when they see Lucifer work those miracles here on earth at the end, in plain sight, they will fall in line to him like all those little school girls did when the Beatles and Elvis Pressley got up on stage and did a little shakin'.

2 John 1:7
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Where in Scripture does Lucifer confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?

 

[Ronald D Milam]

Who is the Antichrist?

Per my Bible, it is Lucifer himself.

No brother the Little Horn/Anti-Christ is a man. (Rev. 13, thus the 10 CROWNS are on the horns)

Satan is the Red Dragon. (Rev. 12 thus thus the CROWNS are on the 7 Heads being spoken about in these Mediterranean Sea Kingdoms Region, just as Satan is over every Kingdom (crown) on earth as he told Jesus in Luke ch. 4. I give ALL OF THESE KINGDOMS unto you if you will just kneel down and worship me. The reason its just 7 is there is a certain region in the world at play in prophetic utterance in those passages.

The Scarlet Colored Beast has NO CROWNS look for one in Rev. 17, it is not mentioned, because the Scarlet Colored Beast is Apollyon. The Beast that was (over the 5 and Rome) IS NOT (he is currently in the Bottomless Pit) YET IS (he will be released from the bottomless pit at the first woe. He is always under Satan on this earth (no crowns) and he is not a human being who can be a kings (thus no crowns in the 7 headed 10 horn region). He is the king of the bottomless pit, but that has nothing to do with the 7 heads and 10 horns, BUT..........he is indeed OF THE SEVEN........And is an 8th, God loves His riddles, no doubt.

The word "antichrist" in the Greek comes from 2 Greek words, 'anti' which can mean 'in place of', and 'christos' which is singular for Christ. So the direct meaning from Greek to English actually is... the 'in place of Christ'.

We do not even have to use the name Anti-Christ, that is a CATCH ALL for the Man of Sins many names, Little Horn, The Wicked One, the Beast, The Assyrian, etc. etc. etc. But in John he calls him THAT anti-christ speaking of the coming Little Horn who we know is anti-God in nature. The spirit of anti-christ predates Satan being created, most people do not get that, it really means AGAINST God, and the Messiah is God. So, God is Good, Holy, Peaceful, Loving, Kind etc. etc. and thus EVERYTHING that would be considered Anti-God would mean the opposite of the Godhead, that is the anti-christ or ant-God spirit. God is a Spirit, the opposite of God is a spirit also.

Not many people actually get why its called an ANTI-CHRIST/Messiah/God SPIRIT. Not a BEING, but a Spirit !! Satan is a Created Being, not a Spirit. Ever think of this in depth? God is a Spirit, thus the anti-God is also a spirit of evil.

THAT Anti-Christ John was pointing unto was a Man who will come at the end with "anti-God" Spirit in him. Not with Satan in him. Satan was also brought low by the same Spirit (Anti-God) he said I will take the place of God !! That is ANTI God SPIRIT.

Who was it that first rebelled in wanting to sit in God's Place, and even claimed that he would become like The Most High? (and that includes Christ's Place).

I agree, Satan was the first being, BUT.........you are overlooking the fact this is a Spirit, not a Created Being. If God is eternal (He is) then everything ANTI God also has to be eternal.

How is it that so many Christian brethren have either never learned, or have forgotten the ancient event of Satan's rebellion that caused God to bring this present word in order to offer up His Son on the cross as our Savior and Redeemer? God is going to allow Lucifer to come to OUR world for the very end, and play The Christ, even with the full load of great signs, wonders, and miracles to fool the whole world with! And because so many people today are totally wrapped up in their flesh and material lusts, when they see Lucifer work those miracles here on earth at the end, in plain sight, they will fall in line to him like all those little school girls did when the Beatles and Elvis Pressley got up on stage and did a little shakin'.

Here is the gist, I call him Anti-Christ because its easier to call him ONE NAME instead of his 33 or so, but if you want to call him the Little Horn we can, that is why I went through years of saying this, the "Anti-Christ/Little Horn/Beast" so people could not try to mention this point, because most really do not understand the anti-Christ/God spirit is not a created BEING at all. It is just everything that opposes God.

 

[Davy]

No brother the Little Horn/Anti-Christ is a man. (Rev. 13, thus the 10 CROWNS are on the horns)

You've never read Isaiah 14 then where God points to Lucifer as a 'man'? Don't you recall Genesis 1:26-27 that the image of man originates from God's Own Image outer Likeness? Can you not understand that image of man began in the Heavenly, and not with flesh?

This point is one of the deceptions being pushed in today's Churches by the devil's servants and the deceived who listen to them. By not understanding how all... the angels, including Lucifer, also have the image of a 'man', what Lord Jesus' showed in His Revelation about Lucifer literally coming to our earthly dimension for the end is completely passed over (Revelation 12:7-17).

Have you never read Genesis 18 & 19 either? Abraham was at his tent door, and looking up he saw "three men". One of them was Lord Jesus in OT times, and it was Jesus who Abraham was speaking with there. The other two 'men' were the two angels sent to Lot in the next Genesis 19 chapter. And even there, the sodomites saw those two angels as 'men'. And there is nothing... written there about their having to take on a human flesh form just to appear on earth with that image of man. That image exists in the Heavenly even with our Heavenly Father upon His Throne.

Only once that above is understood, can one properly begin to interpret about the coming false one at the end that Lord Jesus and His disciples warned the Church about.

 

[Ronald D Milam]

You've never read Isaiah 14 then where God points to Lucifer as a 'man'? Don't you recall Genesis 1:26-27 that the image of man originates from God's Own Image outer Likeness? Can you not understand that image of man began in the Heavenly, and not with flesh?

Angels were called men by the Prophets many times. They appear as men. Satan is a disembodied Angel. God calls the first day (YOWM) also, but it lasts 9.2 billion years, because YOWM really doesn't mean day, it means time period in general, FILL IN THE DETAILS. Look it up, YOWM has about 50 meaning, day, year, month, season. X LONG, X WHOLE, 2 YEARS, as long as one lives etc. etc. So, each time period God is describing can be understand but us today, but not by them, we have things that can measure the speed of light. So, I would worry about Satan being called a Man, Daniel called Jesus (The Man in Linen) but he is really God. You are overthinking it. The Last Beast is a man, not Satan. the Red Dragon is Satan, the Scarlet Colored Beast is Apollyon. Its that simple.

This point is one of the deceptions being pushed in today's Churches by the devil's servants and the deceived who listen to them. By not understanding how all... the angels, including Lucifer, also have the image of a 'man', what Lord Jesus' showed in His Revelation about Lucifer literally coming to our earthly dimension for the end is completely passed over (Revelation 12:7-17).

This is about Satan getting cast out of the 2nd Heaven (our universe) where he will remain forever. Remember Peter saying our earth and this whole universe will burn up? Satan and all his followers will burn forever on this earth. He will have won his prized possession.

Have you never read Genesis 18 & 19 either? Abraham was at his tent door, and looking up he saw "three men". One of them was Lord Jesus in OT times, and it was Jesus who Abraham was speaking with there. The other two 'men' were the two angels sent to Lot in the next Genesis 19 chapter. And even there, the sodomites saw those two angels as 'men'. And there is nothing... written there about their having to take on a human flesh form just to appear on earth with that image of man. That image exists in the Heavenly even with our Heavenly Father upon His Throne.

It is NOT REGISTERING brother, they are Angels (Messengers of God) and God designed us in the same manner, except they already have glorious bodies we don't. Some angels are far grander, 7-10 feet tall, some stand at God's gates day and night and are called covering angels. Believe me, we can not travel from planet to planet in seconds, they can. We do not have glorious bodies, they do.

Have you ever seen a Demon with a body? No, they have to act through others. They are spirits now, God took their bodies away.

Only once that above is understood, can one properly begin to interpret about the coming false one at the end that Lord Jesus and His disciples warned the Church about.

I'll never get there brother, Satan is the Rev. 12 Beast, The Little Horn/Beast is the Man of Sin Beast, and Apollyon is the Scarlet Beast.

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

Only those who study enough of their Bible to KNOW the final beast system of Revelation 13:1 DOES NOT point to Rome, nor NY, nor Brussels, nor to Assyria, will understand about those FIVE PIECES of the Daniel 2 beast statue.

The old Roman empire did not involve ten kings, nor will the final beast at the end of this world be about Rome.

It's pretty obvious that you don't know what you're talking about here, because the toes are an extension of the legs. The message God was clearly sending through the statue about the dream is that the toes are an extension of the Roman empire, and that the final Gentile empire will come out of that territory. The beast that is ridden by the woman in Rev. 17 is inherently Roman, as it is clearly mentioned as sitting on 7 hills. What other place on Earth is known for being located on 7 hills?

 

[Davy]

It's pretty obvious that you don't know what you're talking about here, because the toes are an extension of the legs. The message God was clearly sending through the statue about the dream is that the toes are an extension of the Roman empire, and that the final Gentile empire will come out of that territory. The beast that is ridden by the woman in Rev. 17 is inherently Roman, as it is clearly mentioned as sitting on 7 hills. What other place on Earth is known for being located on 7 hills?

The ten toes of the LAST piece of the beast statue in Daniel 2 involves a beast with ALL THE PREVIOUS BEAST PIECES together (the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, the gold). That did not happen with the Roman empire. That is yet another... way how we can be certain that that final beast in the days of Christ's future coming has to be one to include all those pieces together, and thus does not point directly to Rome, but to a GLOBALIST SYSTEM, which can include deceived Rome.

So nah, I don't buy the false Preterist and Historicist views with trying to claim today's Rome is the head of the final beast system, and a pope as the coming Antichrist. That view's probability ended... with the old Reformers who believed that in their era centuries ago, because of the how the Catholic Church persecuted the Protestants. That era failed to fulfill Bible prophecy, but Satan's servants still like to use it today to deceive many deceived brethren who make the mistake of listening to Satan's servants planted in those type of Churches.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Protestants have called Rome or the Vatican a city of seven hills for ages. Not only have they associated them with Rome, but because of this, they have also attributed all the evils of the man of sin to the church! Even saying the Church would produce both the anti-Christ and false prophet.

There are about 20 cities on the planet labeled, "a city of seven hills."

Rome, and especially Vatican hill, IS NOT the city of seven hills or seven mountains mentioned in Revelation 17!

The Protestants and the reformers had a lot to do with that misleading blunder! Mecca also has seven hills. Jerusalem.... has seven mountains, which is the correct rendering of the text.

Revelation 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

The word 'hills' is an incorrect translation. The word is 'oros' which is better translated 'mountains' anyway! The only time the word 'oros' implies a hill is when the context does so. In Revelation 17:9 the passage in no way suggest 'hills.' Rome does not sit on seven mountains!

I respectfully disagree. John was given a way to identify that he was speaking of Rome without having to actually say it, thereby exhibiting what would be viewed as sedition. There are several unmistakable signs that John was identifying Babylon as Rome, though its secrecy would not have been hidden from Christians.

1) John referred to her as "Mystery Babylon," indicating it was not literal Babylon. It was a cryptic reference to a city. This city would martyr prophets and apostles, which could only be Rome, at least from John's perspective.
2) John called it the city that rules the world, which could only have been understood as Rome.
3) John, in calling her Babylon, referenced the Dan 7 prophecy, in which Babylon was the 1st Kingdom and Rome the 4th Kingdom. Babylon thus led to Rome.
4) John gave two hidden puzzles, turning the 7 kings of the Antichrist into symbols of 7 successive kingdoms, the 6th kingdom being currently in power. Beginning with Egypt, one ends up with the 6th kingdom being Rome.
5) Since the 6th kingdom was Rome, the 7th and last had to be the kingdom of Antichrist, since in Dan 7 the 4th Kingdom, Rome, was the last and would lead to the Antichristian Kingdom.
6) The last puzzle extracted from the 7 Kings of the Antichrist utilized the number 7 as representative of 7 mountains, or hills. Since Rome was known as the city of 7 hills, this had to be Rome, since John was currently imprisoned by Rome and would not have been speaking of other cities outside of his environment. He would not have been speaking of Jerusalem, which had already fallen, and which was no ruling city of the world presenting a threat to Christians.
7) Rome was the 4th Kingdom of Dan 7, and is to lead right up to the Kingdom of Antichrist. The Great Whore represents the territory where Christianity was initially founded. Falling from this position of Faith one becomes a "Whore," just as Jerusalem did when she fell into spiritual adultery.

 

[Randy Kluth]

All that and you didn't provide even ONE verse that specifically points to Rome. Why is that?
Babylon is NOT Rome. Never has been and never will be. Babylon is Babylon. The only two figurative meanings it has are confusion and false religion. Rome is NOT a false religion.

While you're at it. Can you quote even ONE verse that specifically points to Rome?

How is Rome the fourth kingdom of Daniel 7?

Why are you angry that someone has a different opinion than you? I gave you about 7 points that indicated they pointed to Rome, and I explained why John didn't come out and identify Rome as Rome.

The 4th Kingdom of Dan 7 is, I believe, the same 4th Kingdom as in Dan 2. Both Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel had dreams about the same 4 kingdoms. And Daniel identified the 1st king of the 1st Kingdom as Nebuchadnezzar himself, ie Babylon. Simply counting down kingdoms successively from Babylon we arrive at the Roman Kingdom, which is perhaps most significant of all, since it was in the reign of Rome that Christ himself was crucified, and the original apostles persecuted and martyred.

The question I would ask is, How can Mystery Babylon not be Rome? The fact she is described as a "mystery" indicates this is a hidden identity. The fact she kills the apostles clearly identifies her as Rome, as well as the fact she was in John's time the principle city ruling that part of the world.

 

[Randy Kluth]

What drives me nuts about these interpretations is that you are literally attributing all the evils of the last days to THE Christians and the CHURCH! How wonderful!

I did no such thing. The fall of Western Civilization indicts paganism--not genuine Christianity. I'm not a hater of the Catholic Church, nor of any ecclesiastical organization representing true Christianity. But wherever there is a form of religion there can be a replacement of the genuine with the false. The corruption of Israel happened, and the corruption of European Christianity is already happening, as well. Wake up!

 

[Davy]

Angels were called men by the Prophets many times. They appear as men. Satan is a disembodied Angel. God calls the first day (YOWM) also, but it lasts 9.2 billion years, because YOWM really doesn't mean day, it means time period in general, FILL IN THE DETAILS. Look it up, YOWM has about 50 meaning, day, year, month, season. X LONG, X WHOLE, 2 YEARS, as long as one lives etc. etc. So, each time period God is describing can be understand but us today, but not by them, we have things that can measure the speed of light. So, I would worry about Satan being called a Man, Daniel called Jesus (The Man in Linen) but he is really God. You are overthinking it. The Last Beast is a man, not Satan. the Red Dragon is Satan, the Scarlet Colored Beast is Apollyon. Its that simple.

What a bunch of Jewish crock.

The Genesis 1:26-27 verses declare what 'image' likeness God created man's image from.

So your idea that, "the prophets said this, or that", as if they didn't really know what they were talking about, but you do, is all a CROCK.

LOL!!!!

 

[Randy Kluth]

What a bunch of Jewish crock.

The Genesis 1:26-27 verses declare what 'image' likeness God created man's image from.

So your idea that, "the prophets said this, or that", as if they didn't really know what they were talking about, but you do, is all a CROCK.

LOL!!!!

Let's not destroy this conversation with a bunch of name calling? I find some of the subject matter to be interesting and worth thinking about. It's difficult when it becomes overly aggressive. I certainly don't mind a little emotion, but I'm just asking for some moderation?

The idea of angels having bodies, and how this fits into the 2 Beasts of Rev 13, is something worth considering. I don't believe any of the Beasts are Satan himself, because we are told the Beast is inspired by Satan and given his power.

It is strange that demons have had to operate through other bodies, seemingly having had their own bodies removed?? I believe that people were made after the image of a heavenly body, because they weren't made physical bodies after their own physical bodies.

Angels of God likely have spiritual bodies which are nonetheless bodies. But they do seem able to travel through a worm hole or be trans-dimensional. And they apparently can dress up in human disguise. All of this is over my head but interesting to consider. We are told we will one day, as saints, have spiritual bodies, as well--often called glorified bodies.

Satan likely wants to possess humans like other demons. He apparently has lost his place in heaven and with it his glorified body. And so he wants to possess the Beast and his empire on earth. Through this he hopes to control the world, removing all semblance of Christianity.

I don't recall where you stand on all this--I've heard so many varied opinions from many different people. There seems to be as many different positions as there are Christians? Maybe that's because we're operating in the realm of speculation, which is legitimate. But let's try to get our ideas out there for consideration--not for fighting over?

I don't believe people are going to burn with fire forever and ever--nothing could ever be that cruel! An everlasting fire is just a synonym for permanent removal. When a fire burns up trash, the trash is gone forever. It can be said it went into an "everlasting fire." It doesn't mean the fire keeps burning the trash forever. It just means the trash is forever burned up and removed.

And so, I think the damned will leave this planet and lose whatever their present bodies are, just like the demons lost their original bodies. But what bodies they are fit with depends on the environment they will be sent to.

I seriously think God has a purpose for all those created in His image, including the rebels. They will probably be sent to an isolated planet where work will be somewhat laborious. But they will glorify God even though they've rebelled. Their rebellion will, however, end permanently. Just my thoughts....

 

[Davy]

When those who try... to make a joke of God's written Word by their idiotic statements, it's time to make a joke of them.

 

[stormymonday]

Why are you angry that someone has a different opinion than you? I gave you about 7 points that indicated they pointed to Rome, and I explained why John didn't come out and identify Rome as Rome.

The 4th Kingdom of Dan 7 is, I believe, the same 4th Kingdom as in Dan 2. Both Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel had dreams about the same 4 kingdoms. And Daniel identified the 1st king of the 1st Kingdom as Nebuchadnezzar himself, ie Babylon. Simply counting down kingdoms successively from Babylon we arrive at the Roman Kingdom, which is perhaps most significant of all, since it was in the reign of Rome that Christ himself was crucified, and the original apostles persecuted and martyred.

The question I would ask is, How can Mystery Babylon not be Rome? The fact she is described as a "mystery" indicates this is a hidden identity. The fact she kills the apostles clearly identifies her as Rome, as well as the fact she was in John's time the principle city ruling that part of the world.

I'm not at all angry. What happened during John's time has no bearing on what happens 2,000 years in the future. There's nothing about Rome's identity that's a 'mystery'. And Rome no longer persecutes prophets and apostles.

The sequence of kingdoms I believe in Daniel 2 predates the one that claims Rome is the legs of iron. It goes back to the time of Josephus which is...
Babylon = Head of Gold
Mede's = Arms of silver
Persian' s = Thighs of brass
Greeks = Legs of iron.

The reformers were convinced that since Rome crucified Christ, persecuted 1st century Christians, destroyed Jerusalem and Herod's temple, and persecuted Christians for defecting from the faith, they believed Rome would also emerge as the end-time beast of Daniel and Revelation. I believe the reformers were wrong about this and Daniel 2 and 7 as well.

We agree that in Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon is the head of gold. After Babylon...

Daniel 2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.

Most people believe that Medo-Persia form the arms of silver or the 'inferior kingdom.'

The only thing said about the second kingdom is that it's inferior to Babylon. Was Medo-Persia the inferior kingdom? Absolutely not! The Median Empire was not only much smaller it was also short lived enduring only 6 years. Some interpreters claim this is a cultural or religious inferiority. The word 'inferior' proves otherwise.
The word INFERIOR...

The word inferior is the word "arah" which means earth, world, and ground.



It's only translated EARTH in Daniel 2, but it is coupled with the word BELOW which in the NT - inferior means 'TO MAKE LESS'. Gesenius says, "the ground, and adverb below" - inferior. The interlinear uses the word, 'earthward'. In my view inferior means 'less land' and that rules out the Medo-Persian empire as the second empire since it was 3-4 times the size of Babylon. It wasn't 'land inferior' to Babylon. The Median Empire was not only short-lived but was also much smaller making it the inferior kingdom.

In both Greek and Hebrew inferior means,
to make less,
inferior,
to fall short,
below

Daniel, Isaiah, and Jeremiah's prophecies ascribe the conquest and destruction of Babylon to the Darius and the Medes, NOT Cyrus the Persian.

Daniel 5:31
"And Darius the Median took the kingdom, (Babylon) being about threescore and two years old."

Isaiah 13:17
"Behold, I will stir up the Medes against them, i.e. (Babylon)

Jeremiah 51:11 Make bright the arrows; gather the shields: the LORD hath raised up the spirit of the kings of the Medes: for his device is against Babylon, to destroy it; because it is the vengeance of the LORD, the vengeance of his temple.

After reading the above, people usually quote Daniel 8:19-21.

Daniel 8:19-21
"And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end [shall be]. The ram which thou sawest having [two] horns [are] the kings of Media and Persia."

Daniel 8:3 shows that the Ram emerged from two kingdoms. The smaller horn is the INFERIOR kingdom of the Medes which rose first, and the larger horn that rose afterwards, the kingdom of the Persians. Then the two eventually merged into ONE kingdom - the Ram.

I was by the river of Ulai. Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had [two] horns: and the [two] horns [were] high; but one [was] higher than the other, and the higher came up last. I saw the ram pushing westward, and northward, and southward; so that no beasts might stand before him, neither [was there any] that could deliver out of his hand; but he did according to his will and became great.

Secularist and many Protestants believe Cyrus the Persian conquered Babylon, but scriptures say that Darius the Mede invaded and conquered Babylon.

The reason for this is that there's very little secular history on Darius. If they were to agree with the bible instead of secular history where Daniel 5:31 says that Darius the Mede took Babylon at age 62. That would blow the revived Roman empire theory right out of the water! Something they've been teaching for centuries.

The Medes were superior warriors compared to the Persians, but the Persians were better engineers and nation builders than the Medes. They had their own languages and 'kingdoms'. Cyrus married Darius' sister. The two kingdoms were confederate, but Darius is the one who first went into battle as it was the custom of that day for the elder to be first in battle. The Median kingdom occupied Babylon for only 6 years (there are several scriptures that prove this) before the Persians under Cyrus had what I would call a family coup, where only about 100 people died to take control over the kingdom.

Daniel 6:1 "It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom an hundred and twenty princes, which should be over the whole kingdom;"

Daniel 9:1 "In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;"

Zec. 7"1 "And it came to pass in the fourth year of king Darius, that the word of the LORD came unto Zechariah in the fourth day of the ninth month, even in Chisleu;

Ezra 6:15 "And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king."

Then, after the coup, they combined their efforts under Cyrus which became the 'Ram.' Darius was then placed as a vassal over the northern province of the kingdom and Cyrus the southern part.

The Legs of Iron

Since I understand the Medes as the 'arms of silver' and the Persians the 'thighs of bronze', the fourth kingdom symbolized by the 'legs of iron' CANNOT be ROME but Greece. Its end-time offspring, "the toes mingled with iron and clay" come from the Grecian Empire which is in accord with Daniel 8's little horn which is said to come from the realm of GRECIA, and Daniel 11:2. That Empire as well as the others depicted in the statue, didn't cover Rome or Europe as they were Mid-East Empires. Rome is excluded as the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 and cannot be the origin of either the two or ten horned beast, or Daniel 7's 'fearful and dreadful' fourth beast. (anti-Christ and false prophet, etc. ???).