The Biblical Principle Of Nations: Identifying The Ten Kingdoms Of Ezekiel 38

[veteran]

Of course it's specific. My 1972 book version of Strong's says "ARABIA" and the online version Gesennius say's an ARABIAN!

The Aramaic word 'arab translated as "mixed" (KJV) in Dan.2:41 is about the ten toes of iron mixed with clay, not the Arab peoples. The idea that the two materials of iron and clay will NOT mix is a strong concept about division, since iron will not literally mix with clay. It's not the Arab peoples, because they don't have that division problem while joined in the same cause against Israel.

It's about two different groups joined together in the same cause. It's about one-world government, because with that movement both the free nations and Communist nations are joined together under one cause through a world body like the U.N. They're trying to create a joining between East and West, but it's not going to mix.

I'm sure I've said this before....
Daniel tells Nebuchadnezzar much more about the iron and clay than any of the other kingdoms probably because it's an end-time kingdom that the Lord returns to destroy.

It is just that as you say, an endtime world beast kingdom, the one Christ showed John in Rev.13:1-2 that's to have ten horns, ten crowns, and seven heads. No brainer. That's the 5th beast kingdom of Dan.2 that Christ will come to smite upon its feet of ten toes of part iron mixed with part clay. It's been busy forming up for centuries now, coming to fruition past the 1940's especially. The supposed defeat of Communism and opening up of the Iron Curtain has been a major pointer to it forming up to try and join East with West only in our present century.

I've never heard anyone argue for five empires in Daniel 2?...I guess that is because most scholars recognize that Daniel chapter 2 must be interpreted in context with Daniel chapter 7...If Daniel chapter 2 doesn't make it clear enough for you, Daniel chapter 7 leaves no room to doubt that both visions are concerned with only four empires since it names three of them, leaving only the fourth unnamed.

The fourth beast mentioned in Dan.7 is inclusive of both the old pagan Roman empire and a final Rev.13:1-2 beast kingdom. This is why many Christian scholars have considered a 'revival' of the old Roman empire for the very end.

If you try to apply the 4th beast kingdom only for the end, then that is to delete the historical pagan Roman empire out of the Daniel picture totally. But when looking carefully at the picture given in Dan.2 with the beast image, noting it actually has FIVE parts and not just four, AND they are to all be 'together' for the final beast kingdom at the end, then the mystery begins to open up. God often gives us prophetic patterns for fulfillment like the "ensamples" idea Paul expressed in 1 Cor.10, and the no new thing under the sun idea per Solomon in Eccl.1:9.

God used the historical Assyrian and king of Babylon as an anti-types for Satan (Isa.10; Isa.30; Isa.14). In 165-170 B.C. Antiochus IV almost completely fulfilled the role of the "vile person" and abomination idol prophecy in Daniel. In Revelation Christ equates the final beast kingdom with the title of Babylon although it's clear He did not mean the old historical Babylon kingdom that no longer exists.

Many Christian brethren are very lacking in that kind of Bible study. It is not taught in the Churches because many are not studied in God's Word enough to grasp it. Yet many, many pastors and scholars do grasp it. And it is a level of understanding God gave us in His Word.

 

[revturmoil]

Teleiosis said,

Tell me: How is it that the beasts of Daniel 7 are the same as the parts of the statue in Daniel 2 when according to
Daniel 7:12, after the fourth beast is destroyed, the three previous beasts are allowed to "live" a little longer?

Babylon and Medes-Persia are history.

And tell me too, if the clay is "mixed" with the iron, is the Kingdom still the "Iron" Kingdom?

If the Aramaic word "mix" is closely related to the Hebrew word for "steppe dweller," or "desert platea," could this not suggest who is "mixed" in with the iron Kingdom that supplanted Greece: Rome? Do not the European countries nearly all house sizable Muslim minorities that do not "mix" with the historical culture of each nation?

The first three beast have their dominion taken away. This sounds like all of them are trying to dominate the region but are subdued by the fourth beast.
How is Daniel 7 the same as Daniel 2? Were there flaws and shortcomings in Daniel 2 where God found it necessary to give Daniel a repeat vision with a repeat interpretation?
I've already explained how Daniel's prophecy of the lion cannot be about Babylon rising since it had already risen decades (35 years) before Daniel wrote chapter 7 and Babylon was on it's way out.
Daniel 7:4 　The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
5 　And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.
6 　After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.
7 　After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
8 　I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
How is the passage above the same as this one below? You can try to explain how they're the same but I truthfully see no connection at all.
Daniel 2:32 　This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,
33 　His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.
I must repeat myself again.
The word inspired means God breathed or God spoke.
God spoke to His prophets in the language they spoke and understood. So ONE part of my hermeneutic is not only to look at the meaning of biblical words or "His Word" in the original language it was spoken, understood, and written. But also to accept it's meaning regardless if it goes against what I already believe.
Then I look at how that same word is used in other passages. And if I have to I look at the grammar. I think the definition of the words 'mixed' and 'inferior' in Daniel 2 are only used here in Daniel 2 and nowhere else in the bible. Inferior is 'land' and mixed is 'arab.' I accept those definitions. Others don't because it debunks the Revived Roman Empire.
I also look at the context of the passage I'm trying to understand.
Then when necessary I look at the historical value.
The desert is where the Arab's pitch their tents. The desert is where the Harlot was seen by John sit upon the beast. The word wilderness is better translated 'desert.'

Rev 17:3 So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
The desert is where Mecca and Medina reside. They are 'The glory of Kedar."

So now back to Daniel 7. Everybody avoids the interpretational delima with the passage that Babylon having already risen. The word 'BEFORE.'
Daniel 7:7 　After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
If you do an unbiased research of the word before you'll see that it means, "in front of" or "in the persence of." The verse doesn't imply the lion, bear, and leopard emerge before the dreadful and terrible beast. It implies that the dreadful and terrible beast and the others are all present at the same time.
Here are some examples how the same word 'before' is used.
Ezra 4:18 　The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me.
Ezra 4:23 　Now when the copy of king Artaxerxes' letter was read before Rehum, and Shimshai the scribe, and their companions, they went up in haste to Jerusalem unto the Jews, and made them to cease by force and power.
Ezra 7:19 　The vessels also that are given thee for the service of the house of thy God, those deliver thou before the God of Jerusalem.
Daniel 2:10 　The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said.....
Daniel 2:24 　¶Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch, whom the king had ordained to destroy the wise men of Babylon: he went and said thus unto him; Destroy not the wise men of Babylon: bring me in before the king, and I will shew unto the king the interpretation.
There are more examples and I hope you see the point that 'before' in front of or in the persence of. So the four beast depicted in Daniel 7 are all end-time kingdoms since they are on earth at the same time.
Iron and clay may represent the Sunni and Shia sects of Islam. The dominate religion of the Arab's and Arabia. "MIXED!"
I use to believe in globalism, a pre-trib rapture, and The revived Roman empire.
Richard said,

I've never heard anyone argue for five empires in Daniel 2?...I guess that is because most scholars recognize that Daniel chapter 2 must be interpreted in context with Daniel chapter 7...If Daniel chapter 2 doesn't make it clear enough for you, Daniel chapter 7 leaves no room to doubt that both visions are concerned with only four empires since it names three of them, leaving only the fourth unnamed.

I disagree and explained why in my reply above.
There are 6 empires depicted in Daniel 2.
1.Babylon the Head of Gold
2. Media the chest and arms of silver
3. Persia the thighs of brass
4. Greece the legs of iron
5. Toes mingled with iron and clay are the end-time Arabs and Muslim's
6. Stone that is cut without hands that destroys all the others is "Daniel 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever."
Identifying Daniel 2 with Daniel 7 is a real interpretational blunder. Anybody willing to change their mind?
Or are you all bound to your beliefs and unwilling to!

 

[teleiosis]

1. I made no mention of the word "before" nor did I define it as being in time rather than place.

2a. Where does it say that the fourth terrible beast subdues the previous three?
2b. Where does it say that the first three beasts lose their dominion?

3. Specifically, where in Scripture does Daniel says there is a "FIFTH" Kingdom.

Daniel 2:39 "After you, another kingdom will arise, inferior to yours. Next, a third kingdom, one of bronze, will rule over the whole earth.
Daniel 2:40 Finally, there will be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron—for iron breaks and smashes everything—and as iron breaks things to pieces, so it will crush and break all the others.
Daniel 2:41 Just as you saw that the feet and toes were partly of baked clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom; yet it will have some of the strength of iron in it, even as you saw iron mixed with clay.

Daniel 2:41 does not say another Kingdom comes after the fourth. Daniel 2:41, speaking of the fourth Kingdom, indicates that it changes over time, as time goes forward as the view goes down the statue. It is still "iron."

4. Since you already believe that Islam will rule the world, how has this shaped your interpretation?

5a. Are these words God-breathed? their faces shall sup up as the east wind, (5 times a day)
5b. If so, where are they written?

 

[veteran]

1. I made no mention of the word "before" nor did I define it as being in time rather than place.

2a. Where does it say that the fourth terrible beast subdues the previous three?

Right here it is hinted at...

Dan 7:7
7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
(KJV)

Dan 7:12
12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.
(KJV)

If the rest of the beast's lives were prolonged for a 'season', then it means they continue to exist, and that means under that forth beast. But it's obvious you don't want this pointed out, but only want to see the three horns which are subdued of Dan.7:24, per your blinders again.

2b. Where does it say that the first three beasts lose their dominion?

Daniel 7:12. How many revisions will your book need?

3. Specifically, where in Scripture does Daniel says there is a "FIFTH" Kingdom.

Count the number of pieces of the beast statue image of Neb's dream. Can you count to FIVE, or just four? When someone holds up five fingers, do you only see four?

Dan 2:32 This image's (1) head was of fine gold, (2) his breast and his arms of silver, (3) his belly and his thighs of brass,
33 (4) His legs of iron, (5) his feet part of iron and part of clay.

Now maybe, to some people, one's legs are the same part of the body as one's feet??? That's kind of what wearing blinders does. Guess that'll mean another book revision. Hope we don't see it on the front shelves at Lifeway.

 

[teleiosis]

Veteran: You don't have to be insulting. I use several Bible versions and Greek and Hebrew language and grammar reference books as well as concordances.

Daniel 2:39-41 spells out four Kingdoms. It does not mention a fifth. The feet are still iron. If the feet were just clay, I'd go along with your way of thinking. The iron of Rome is now "mixed" with "Arabs." How poetic of the Hebrew to use the double entendre to make a point.

The three previous beasts of Daniel 7 do not lose their dominion in sequence fashion like the parts of Nebuchadnezzar's statue. They are part of the fourth terrible beast as Rev 13:2 lists the beast of a nation. When the "head" of the fourth is gone, the three that make up its body still live - for a while. But like the statue of Daniel 2, all the nations of man are blown away by the Kingdom of Christ on earth.

The three horns of Dan 7;24 concern three of the ten Kings. These are revealed in Rev 17:12. Dan 7:24 does not describe the lion, bear and leopard.

 

[veteran]

Veteran: You don't have to be insulting. I use several Bible versions and Greek and Hebrew language and grammar reference books as well as concordances.

Well, yes I do with someone who's pumped up to be something they are not.

Daniel 2:39-41 spells out four Kingdoms. It does not mention a fifth. The feet are still iron. If the feet were just clay, I'd go along with your way of thinking. The iron of Rome is now "mixed" with "Arabs." How poetic of the Hebrew to use the double entendre to make a point.

You're absolutey right! The Daniel Scripture DOES NOT 'specifically' mention a 5th beast kingdom. Doesn't mean the Daniel Scripture does not point to a 5th one though, and that's what you're missing.

The other major truth you are missing is staring you right in the face! If the 4th beast of legs of iron was the old pagan Roman Empire of history, and since it is no more, YET... you choose to believe Rome today represents the 4th beast, THEN HOW IS THAT NOT A MAJOR ERROR of interpretation?

Are there TWO 4th beasts then? No, because Daniel shows ONLY ONE 4th beast kingdom, not two at different times. That... is actually what you're proposing with your thinking of today's Rome being iron mixed with Arabs!

Moreover, the Daniel Scripture specifically shows that ALL the beast kingdoms are TOGETHER as one in final, which you clearly haven't even begun to grasp!

So if you go writing your book now, you'll be sorry for it later once, or if, The Lord reveals this matter to you.

 

[Richard Neal]

Why would anyone argue for five empires from Nebuchadnezzar's dream (Daniel 2) when the vision specifically says there were four?"..."You [Nebuchadnezzar = Babylon] are that head of god" (Dan 2:38) (Empire #1)..."After you [Babylon], another kingdom [Medo-Persia] will rise, inferior to yours" (Dan 2:39) (Empire #2)..."Next, a third kingdom [Alexander's Grecian Empire], one of bronze, will rule over the whole earth" (Dan 2:39) (Empire #3)..."Finally, there will be a fourth kingdom [the Kingdom of the Antichrist]..." (Dan 2:40) (Empire #4)....Did you catch that word "Finally" while speaking of the fourth empire?...There is no fifth empire per Daniel's very own words...

Secondly, why do you guys continue to argue for a quais-revised Roman Empire as the fulfillment of the fourth empire of the book of Daniel?...It is exactly this "cold-war era" thinking that I am trying to correct in my new book, Kingdom of the Antichrist/Rise of the Beast...Daniel specifically names the first three "beasts" or empires of Nebuchadnezzar's dream vision (Dan 8:19-21), yet Scripture never names the fourth "beast" or empire. And that is where the whole problem comes in - because many, like the Early Church Fathers (The Roman Empire), or the early Protestant teachers (The Roman Catholic Church), or American theologians during the cold war era with the Soviet Union, saw the fulfillment of the fourth "beast" in terms of the dominate empire of their life times as the fulfillment of the vison. And one, in all honesty, can not blame them for doing so. Nevertheless, sincerity doesn't always equal correct interpretation of Scripture. And the "cold war era" interpretation you guys are trying to push, i.e., that Russia (This "cold-war era" interpretation began with the Soviet Union, then when the Soviet Union evaporated into the history books it morphed into just the Russian people - and not a communistic empire) is Gog of the land of MaGog, and the European Union (Prior to the EU reaching "ten kingdoms" this interpretation was all the rage. Then when the EU went to 13 nations, it became "the three nations that would be subdued by the ten." Now that the EU is 36 countries, even this wild "cold-war era" interpretation has been abandoned by most, but by no means all) is the quasi-revised Roman Empire is wildly wrong...

Scripture gives us Nebuchadnezzar's dream-vision and its interpretation for a very good reason - To let us know that there will be four very specific empires throughout history from the Babylonian era until the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. And that the fourth empire will be "exceedingly terrible" as it will be the Kingdom of the Antichrist, and he, we all know, will send the world into a "Great Tribulation Period" that will be so horrendous as "never be equalled before, and will never be equaled again." In other words, the naming of these four empires are guides for us to follow. The first three, then, are easy, because they are named, but the fourth, because it is not named at first glance appears to be of no apparent value, because in not specifically naming it. Scripture, thus, has allowed, or even caused two-thousand years of speculation as to its true identity...So what benefit is it to know there is a fourth empire, but not knowing its identity?

Again, in speaking of these four kingdoms, Scripture is giving us guide posts to follow; but, because it is never specifically named, how am I to know when the fourth kingdom appears?...Scripture speaks in much greater depth and detail about the fourth empire than the three pervious empires put together. Consequently, even though it doesn't specifically name the fourth empire, it does, nevertheless, give us (at my count) 26 very unique characteristics of this empire to help us correctly identify it from all the other kingdoms of history...It then falls upon us to search out Scripture, to search out the 26 unique characteristics and then apply them to the kingdom we believe it is...If we do this, we quickly see that the Roman Empire, or some speculative quasi-revised Roman Empire can not be the fourth empire of Daniel...Learn these 26 unique characteristics of the fourth empire Scripture gives you, and you will then be able to easily identify that kingdom.

Richard Neal - author Kingdom of the Antichrist

 

[veteran]

5 pieces to the beast image statue in Neb's dream, not 4.

The idea of a revived Roman empire is to treat the 4th beast kingdom of Daniel that was history as a FIFTH beast empire, not a second 4th one. Some just cannot count.

 

[teleiosis]

No, actually your opinion does not change Scripture. Daniel does not tell Nebuchadnezzar that the Iron Kingdom is supplanted by another Clay Kingdom, but describes the end of the Iron Kingdom as being "mixed" with clay.

The fact that the verb "mix" is closely associated in the Hebrew with "Arab," is akin to other "word play" God uses in the Hebrew language.
The additional fact that today, in just the last few decades since WWII, as opposed to 5000 years of recorded history, we have "mixed" nations - ONLY in European-style countries - of Muslims (Arabs) who do not assimilate, but try to fracture a separate society within those native cultures - is the exact fulfillment of Daniel 2.

The funny thing veteran, is that not only are you in the distinct minority, but all your blustering and insults haven't convinced anyone you're right.

 

[veteran]

No, actually your opinion does not change Scripture. Daniel does not tell Nebuchadnezzar that the Iron Kingdom is supplanted by another Clay Kingdom, but describes the end of the Iron Kingdom as being "mixed" with clay.

The fact that the verb "mix" is closely associated in the Hebrew with "Arab," is akin to other "word play" God uses in the Hebrew language.
The additional fact that today, in just the last few decades since WWII, as opposed to 5000 years of recorded history, we have "mixed" nations - ONLY in European-style countries - of Muslims (Arabs) who do not assimilate, but try to fracture a separate society within those native cultures - is the exact fulfillment of Daniel 2.

The funny thing veteran, is that not only are you in the distinct minority, but all your blustering and insults haven't convinced anyone you're right.

Like I said, some people just cannot count. If the 4th beast kingdom of legs of iron was pagan Rome, and the clay idea is supposed to be with it, then how is it that 4th beast kingdom of pagan Rome no longer exists?

If one says the Roman empire never ended then they make themselves look silly, since it ended per history.

This is why some Bible scholars have mentioned the idea of a "revived" Roman empire for the end, which what they are actually inferring is that the old pagan Roman empire of history never really ended. That is the ONLY way the 4th beast could continue to the end times today, only if the old pagan Roman empire never ended. But it did end.

And that's why the vision includes 5 pieces to the beast statue image, and not just 4, with the addition of the clay material mixed with iron for its feet of ten toes. It doesn't need to declare a 5th beast just so those who can't understand will believe it, for the 5 pieces of the statue image declares it, along with the Daniel Scripture of ALL... pieces formed together as one for the end when Christ comes to strike it upon its feet.

 

[teleiosis]

Rome never truly died.

It had two legs: One in Rome and another in Constantinople. You should check your history.

We are the embodiment of Rome today.

Daniel does not have 5 Kingdoms. You cannot find that taught in any Seminary; it's not in any major commentary or Study Bible.

 

[veteran]

Rome never truly died.

It had two legs: One in Rome and another in Constantinople. You should check your history.

We are the embodiment of Rome today.

Daniel does not have 5 Kingdoms. You cannot find that taught in any Seminary; it's not in any major commentary or Study Bible.

I figured you would take that position, i.e., the false idea that pagan Rome never died.

It died alright, it was conquered by the Germanic peoples, the last emperor being Romulus Augustus falling in 476 A.D.

 

[teleiosis]

Nope. It was never wholly conquered, and its people never vanquished, nor taken over by any other.

The whole time the western "leg" of Rome was in disarray, the eastern "leg" of Rome thrived.

In the 9th century, Popes were ensconced in Rome and Charlemagne united Europe.
There was another Holy Roman Empire.

When Constantine fell in the 13th century, its people retreated and the knowledge that was Rome fled before the Turks and re-invigorated the West resulting in the end of the "Dark Ages" and the beginning of the Renaissance!

We are founded on "Western Civilization!" That what was Greece was incorporated into Rome and we STILL have all its vestiges with us today!

Been to a coliseum lately?
Watched gladiators?
- You have if you like football.

Have you seen our buildings? Temples to Government like ancient Parathions?
Which person will you vote for Senator - citizen veteran.

You like your military? It's founded on the Roman model.

No, we ARE Rome: an unbroken 2300 year line.

And today we are mixed with Muslims who want to take us over from within; working against us in our North versus South battle in the War on Terror.

the last emperor being Romulus Augustus falling in 476 A.D.

Last? Not hardly.

Eastern emperors
Leonid dynasty 7 February 457 to 18 January 474
Leo I A common soldier, he was chosen by Aspar, commander-in-chief of the army. Died of dysentery. 18 January 474 to 17 November 474
Leo II Succeeded upon the death of Leo I. Died of an unknown disease, possibly poisoned. 17 November 474 to 9 April 491
Zeno Named co-emperor by his son on 9 February 474, he succeeded upon the death of Leo II. Deposed by Basiliscus, brother-in-law of Leo, he fled to his native country and regained the throne in August 476. 9 January 475 to August 476
Basiliscus General and brother-in-law of Leo I, he seized power from Zeno but was again deposed by him. 479
Marcian Leo I's son–in–law, who resented the accession of Zeno. Captured the imperial palace but was in turn captured. Spent the rest of his life imprisoned in a fortress in Isauria. 484 to 488
Leontius An Isaurian commander who was called on to put down the rebel Illus but declared himself emperor instead. He died after a four year siege of the fortress of Papurius. 11 April 491 to 9 July 518
Anastasius I A palace official (silentiarius) and son-in-law of Leo I, he was chosen as Emperor by Empress-dowager Ariadne 491 to 492
Longinus Brother of the Emperor Zeno, he launched a rebellion to enforce his claim to the throne but was defeated and fled to Egypt where he died. 512
Areobindus Proclaimed emperor during a riot at Constantinople, but refused to accept the nomination.

Justinian dynasty July 518 to 1 August 527
Justin I Officer and commander of the Excubitors bodyguard under Anastasius I, he was elected by army and people upon the death of Anastasius I. 518
Theocritus The comes domesticorum who attempted to buy support for the throne on the death of Anastasius I. 1 August 527 to 13/14 November 565
Justinian I Nephew of Justin I, possibly raised to co-emperor on 1 April 527. Succeeded on Justin I's death. 529
Julianus ben Sabar Leader of a Samaritan revolt, proclaimed "King of Israel". Managed to control the entire Samaria before being defeated. 532
Hypatius A nephew of Anastasius I who was acclaimed emperor during the Nika riots. 536-545
Stotzas A Byzantine soldier who was elected the leader of rebel troops in the recently conquered Vandal Kingdom of Africa. Aiming to establish a new kingdom, he was defeated on a number of occasions before finally being defeated and mortally wounded in 545. 537
John Cottistis Usurper in Mesopotamia, he was an infantry soldier who was acclaimed emperor by his troops, but was killed after four days by imperial forces at Dara. 14 November 565 to 5 October 578
Justin II Nephew of Justinian I, he seized the throne on the death of Justinian I with support of army and Senate. 5 October 578 to 14 August 582
Tiberius II Constantine Succeeded on Justin II's death. 14 April 582 to 22 November 602
Maurice Married the daughter of Tiberius II and succeeded him upon his death. Named his son Theodosius as co-emperor in 600. Deposed by Phocas and executed on 27 November 602 at Chalcedon.

Phocas 23 November 602 to 4 October 610
Phocas Subaltern in the Balkan army, he led a rebellion that deposed Maurice. Deposed and executed by Heraclius.

Heraclian dynasty 5 October 610 to 11 February 641
Heraclius Began a revolt against Phocas in 609 and deposed him in October 610. 610 to 611
Comentiolus The brother of Phocas, he refused to acknowledge Heraclius' accession and planned to enforce his claim to the throne. He was eventually assassinated. 617
John of Conza Described as a tyrannus (a term meaning usurper), he captured Naples but was defeated and killed by Eleutherius, the Exarch of Ravenna. 619
Eleutherius The Exarch of Ravenna, he was a eunuch who set up his capital at Rome, but was murdered by his own troops. 635
John Athalarichos The illegitimate son of Heraclius, he plotted to overthrow his father, but the scheme was uncovered prior to execution. He was mutilated and exiled. 11 February 641 to 24/26 May 641
Constantine III Named co-emperor in 613. Succeeded to throne with Heraklonas following the death of Heraclius. Died of tuberculosis, allegedly poisoned by Empress-dowager Martina. 11 February 641 to September 641
Heraklonas Named co-emperor in 638. Succeeded to throne with Constantine III following the death of Heraclius. Sole emperor after the death of Constantine III, under the regency of Martina. Forced to name Constans II co-emperor by the army, and was deposed by the Senate in September 641. September 641 to 15 September 668
Constans II Raised to co-emperor 641 after his father's death due to army pressure. Became sole emperor after the forced abdication of Heraklonas. Assassinated, possibly on the orders of Mezezius. 642
Maurikios Chartoularios The dux of Rome, he attempted to establish an independent state in Italy. Executed by the Exarch of Ravenna. 644
Valentinus The father–in–law of Constans II, he appeared at Constantinople with a contingent of troops, and demanded to be crowned emperor. He was overwhelmed by a hostile crowd and murdered. 646 to 647
Gregory The Exarch of Carthage, his support of Chalcedonian orthodoxy pushed him into conflict with Constans. Killed in battle against the Arabs. 650 to 652
Olympius The Exarch of Ravenna, he supported the Pope against Constans' religious policies. Marching into Sicily, he died of plague. 651 to 652
Theodoros Pasagnathes A patrikios who rebelled in Armenia. 665 to 666
Eleutherios The leader of a local rebellion that overthrew the exarch Gennadius in Carthage. 667 to 668
Saborios The strategos of the theme of the Armeniacs, he raised a revolt in Anatolia, but died when his out of control horse smashed his head against a city gate. 15 September 668 to September 685
Constantine IV Died of dysentery. 668 to 669
Mezezius Commander of the Opsikion theme, he was chosen by the court at Sicily to replace the murdered Constans II. He was eventually executed by forces loyal to Constantine IV. September 685 to 695
Justinian II Named co-emperor in 681 and became sole emperor upon Constantine IV's death. Deposed by military revolt in 695.

Twenty Years' Anarchy 695 to 698
Leontios General from Isauria, he deposed Justinian II and was overthrown in another revolt in 698. Executed in February 706. 698 to 705
Tiberius III Admiral of Germanic origin, originally named Apsimar. He rebelled against Leontios after a failed expedition. Reigned under the name of Tiberius until deposed by Justinian II in 705. Executed in February 706. August 705 to December 711
Justinian II Returned on the throne with Bulgar support. Named son Tiberius as co-emperor in 706. Deposed and killed by military revolt. December 711 to 3 June 713
Philippikos Bardanes A general of Armenian origin, he deposed Justinian II and was in turn overthrown by a revolt of the Opsician troops. June 713 to November 715
Anastasios II Bureaucrat and secretary under Philippikos, he was raised to the purple by Opsician troops. Deposed by a military revolt. May 715 to 25 March 717
Theodosios III Fiscal official, he was proclaimed emperor by the Opsician troops. Abdicated following the revolt of Leo the Isaurian and became a monk.

Isaurian dynasty 25 March 717 to 18 June 741
Leo III A general. Rose in rebellion and secured the throne. 18 June 741 to 14 September 775
Constantine V Only son of Leo III. Co-emperor since 720, he succeeded upon his father's death. June 741/742 to 2 November 743
Artabasdos General and son-in-law of Leo III, Count of the Opsician Theme. Led a revolt that secured Constantinople, but was defeated and deposed by Constantine V. 14 September 775 to 8 September 780
Leo IV Eldest son of Constantine V. Co-emperor since 751, he succeeded upon his father's death. 8 September 780 to August 797
Constantine VI Only child of Leo IV. Co-emperor in 776, sole emperor upon Leo's death in 780, until 790 under the regency of his mother, Irene of Athens. He was overthrown on Irene's orders, blinded and imprisoned, probably dying of his wounds shortly after. August 797 to 31 October 802
Irene of Athens Overthrew her son in 797 and became empress-regnant. Deposed in a palace coup in 802.

Nikephorian dynasty 31 October 802 to 26 July 811
Nikephoros I General Logothete (finance minister) under Irene, led initially successful campaigns against the Bulgars but was killed at the Battle of Pliska. 2 October 811 to 11 January 812
Staurakios Only son of Nikephoros I, crowned co-emperor in December 803. Succeeded on his father's death; however, he had been heavily wounded at Pliska and left paralyzed. He was forced to resign, and retired to a monastery where he died soon after. 11 January 812 to 11 July 813
Michael I Rangabe Son-in-law of Nikephoros I, he succeeded Staurakios on his abdication. Resigned after the revolt under Leo the Armenian.

Leo the Armenian 11 July 813 to 25 December 820
Leo V Rebelled against Michael I and became emperor. Appointed his son Symbatios co-emperor under the name of Constantine on Christmas 813. Murdered by a conspiracy led by Michael the Amorian.

Amorian dynasty 25 December 820 to 2 October 829
Michael II A friend of Leo V, he was raised to high office but led the conspiracy that murdered him. 2 October 829 to 20 January 842
Theophilos Only son of Michael II. Co-emperor since 821, he succeeded on his father's death. 2 January 842 to 23 September 867
Michael III Succeeded on Theophilos' death. Under the regency of his mother Theodora until 856, and of his uncle Bardas in 862–866. Murdered by Basil the Macedonian.

Macedonian dynasty 867 to 2 August 886
Basil I Succeeded to the throne after murdering Michael III. 886 to 11 May 912
Leo VI Son of Basil I (possibly the son of Michael III). 912 to 913
Alexander III Son of Basil I. 15 May 908 to 9 November 959
Constantine VII Son of Leo VI, until 945 he reigned under regents or senior co-emperors. 17 December 920 to 16 December 944
Romanos I Admiral and father-in-law of Constantine VII, became senior emperor in 920 until his abdication in 944. November 959 to 15 March 963
Romanos II Son of Constantine VII. 16 August 963 to 969
Nikephoros II Married Theophano, Romanos II's widow, regent for Basil II. 11 December 969 to 10 January 976
John I Brother-in-law of Romanos II. 10 January 976 to 15 December 1025
Basil II Son of Romanos II. 15 December 1025 to 15 November 1028
Constantine VIII Son of Romanos II. 15 November 1028 to June 1050
Zoe Daughter of Constantine VIII. 15 November 1028 to 11 April 1034
Romanos III Zoe's first husband. 11 April 1034 to 10 December 1041
Michael IV Zoe's second husband. 10 December 1041 to 20 April 1042
Michael V Michael IV's nephew. 20 April 1042 to 11 January 1055
Theodora Daughter of Constantine VIII. Period of co-rule. 11 June 1042 to 11 January 1055
Constantine IX Zoe's third husband. 11 January 1055 to 31 August 1056
Theodora Daughter of Constantine VIII. Period of sole rule.

Bringas September 1056 to 31 August 1057
Michael VI Court bureaucrat and military logothete Deposed by military revolt under Isaac Komnenos.

Komnenid-Doukid dynasties; Botaneiates 5 June 1057 to 22 November 1059
Isaac I Komnenos Successful general; he rose in revolt leading the eastern armies and was declared Emperor; he was recognized after Michael VI's abdication. Resigned in 1059. 24 November 1059 to 22 May 1067
Constantine X Doukas General and close ally of Isaac Komnenos, and succeeded him as emperor on his abdication. 22 May 1067 to 24 March 1078
Michael VII Doukas Eldest son of Constantine X. Co-emperor since 1059, he succeeded on his father's death. He was under the regency of his mother, Eudokia, from 1067–1068, and was junior emperor under her second husband Romanos IV from 1068–1071. Senior emperor in 1071–1078. He abdicated before the revolt of Nikephoros Botaneiates. 1 January 1068 to 24 October 1071
Romanos IV (Doukas) Successful general; he married empress-dowager Eudokia Makrembolitissa and became senior emperor as guardian of her sons by Constantine X. Deposed by the Doukas partisans after the Battle of Manzikert. 31 March 1078 to 4 April 1081
Nikephoros III (Botaneiates) He rebelled against Michael VII and was welcomed into the capital. Overthrown by the Komnenos clan. 4 April 1081 to 15 August 1118
Alexios I Komnenos Nephew of Isaac I Komnenos. A distinguished general, he overthrew Nikephoros III. He retained Konstantios Doukas as co-emperor until 1087 and named his eldest son John co-emperor in 1092. 15 August 1118 to 8 April 1143
John II Komnenos Eldest son of Alexios I. Co-emperor since 1092, he succeeded upon his father's death. Named his eldest son Alexios co-emperor in 1122, but he died before him. 1143 to 24 September 1180
Manuel I Komnenos Youngest son of John II, he was chosen as emperor over his elder brother Isaac by his father on his deathbed. 24 September 1180 to October 1183
Alexios II Komnenos Only son of Manuel I. In 1180–1182 was under the regency of his mother, Maria of Antioch. She was overthrown by Andronikos I Komnenos, who became co-emperor and finally had Alexios II deposed and killed. 1183 to 11 September 1185
Andronikos I Komnenos Nephew of John II by his brother Isaac. A general, he seized the regency from Maria of Antioch in 1182 and subsequently the throne from his nephew Alexios II. He was overthrown and lynched in a popular uprising.

Angelid dynasty 1185 to 1195
Isaac II Came to the throne at the head of a popular revolt against Andronikos I. He was deposed, blinded and imprisoned by his elder brother, Alexios III. 1195 to 17/18 July 1203
Alexios III Elder brother of Isaac II. He was deposed by the Fourth Crusade. 18 July 1203 to 27/28 January 1204
Isaac II Restored to his throne by the Crusaders, actual rule fell to his son Alexios IV. He was deposed by Alexios V. 1 August 1203 to 27/28 January 1204
Alexios IV Son of Isaac II. He enlisted the Fourth Crusade to return his father to the throne, and reigned alongside his restored father. He was deposed by Alexios V. 5 February 1204 to 13 April 1204
Alexios V Son-in-law of Alexios III and a prominent aristocrat, he deposed Isaac II and Alexios IV in a palace coup. He fled to Thrace after an invasion by crusaders which ended his rule.

Laskarid dynasty (Empire of Nicaea) 1204 to 1205
Contantine (XI) Elected emperor by the citizens of Constantinople on the day the city fell to the crusaders. He later fled to Nicaea and died shortly thereafter. 1205 to December 1221/1222
Theodore I Son-in-law of Alexios III. Proclaimed emperor after his brother Constantine's death in 1205. 15 December 1221/1222 to 3 November 1254
John III Son-in-law of Theodore I. 3 November 1254 to 18 August 1258
Theodore II Only son of John III, he succeeded on his father's death. 18 August 1258 to 25 December 1261
John IV Only son of Theodore II, he succeeded on his father's death. Due to his minority, the regency was exercised at first by George Mouzalon until his assassination, and then by Michael Palaiologos, who within months was crowned senior emperor. After the recovery of Constantinople, Palaiologos deposed him, had him blinded and imprisoned.

Palaiologan dynasty 1 January 1259 to 11 December 1282
Michael VIII Great-grandson of Alexios III, grandnephew of John III by marriage. Co-emperor in 1259. Senior emperor since 25 December 1261. September 1261 to 24 May 1328
Andronikos II Son of Michael VIII. Nominal co-emperor in September, 1261, crowned in 1272. Senior emperor on 11 December 1282. 1281 to 12 October 1320
Michael IX Son of Andronikos II. Co-emperor in 1281, crowned in 1294/1295. 1316 to 15 June 1341
Andronikos III Son of Michael IX. Co-emperor in 1316, rival emperor since July, 1321. Senior emperor on 24 May 1328. 15 June 1341 to 8 February 1347
John V Son of Andronikos III. Emperor. 26 October 1341 to 4 December 1354
John VI Maternal relative of the Palaiologoi. Rival emperor on 26 October 1341. Senior emperor on 8 February 1347. 15 April 1351 to December 1357
Matthew Son of John VI, brother-in-law of John V. Co-emperor on 15 April 1353. Rival emperor since 4 December 1354. 1347 to 12 August 1376
John V Son of Andronikos III, son-in-law of John VI. Co-emperor in 1347. Rival emperor in 1352. Senior Emperor on 4 December 1354. 1352 to 1 July 1379
Andronikos IV Son of John V, grandson of John VI. Co-emperor c. 1352. Senior Emperor on 12 August 1376. 1 July 1379 to 14 April 1390
John V Son of Andronikos III, son-in-law of John VI. Senior Emperor. 1376 to 17 September 1390
John VII Son of Andronikos IV. Co-emperor from 1376 to 1379. Senior emperor on 14 April 1390. 17 September 1390 to 16 February 1391
John V Son of Andronikos III, son-in-law of John VI. Senior Emperor. 1373 to 21 July 1425
Manuel II Son of John V, grandson of John VI, brother of Andronikos IV. Co-emperor in 1373. Senior Emperor on 16 February 1391. 1403 to 1407
Andronikos V Son of John VII. Co-emperor c. 1403. 1416 to 31 October 1448
John VIII Son of Manuel II. Co-emperor c. 1416. Sole emperor on 21 July 1425. 6 January 1449 to 29 May 1453
Constantine XI Son of Manuel II, brother of John VIII.

 

[veteran]

Nope. It was never wholly conquered, and its people never vanquished, nor taken over by any other.

The whole time the western "leg" of Rome was in disarray, the eastern "leg" of Rome thrived.

In the 9th century, Popes were ensconced in Rome and Charlemagne united Europe.
There was another Holy Roman Empire.

Rome was conquered, and the PAGAN Roman Empire ended by the Germanic people's hand. The eastern branch of the old Roman Empire became the Byzantine Empire.

And you confuse the difference with the PAGAN Roman empire with the idea of a pope.

 

[teleiosis]

Christianity became the religion of Rome in the 4th century.
Christianity through the Eastern Greek Orthodox ended up being the religion of Constantinople.

The RCC which had its origins with Constantine in the 4th century in its western half, evolved to the Papacy of the 9th century and had plenty of time in between to grow. Rome and Italy were still part of the Roman world during the Dark Ages when no central leadership existed from Rome itself like in former times. Rome was even part of the Eastern Empire of the Roman Kingdom during this time.

The Eastern branch did not "become" Byzantine. It was taken over in conquest, and Christianity largely retreated before the Muslim invasion. The movement of people, knowledge, and ideas from the East sparked the West's Renaissance.

 

[Trekson]

Hi Teleosis and Vet. Regarding the statue of Dan. 2 I trhink you're both a little right and both a little wrong. Yes, there are four kingdoms depicted in the statue. Daniel's description of them combines the legs of iron and feet of iron and clay into one. Dan. 2:40-43 - "And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.
41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.
42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay."

The solution lies in the reality of a dual prophecy. One for Rome (the legs) and a future combination of the whole statue. What you both seem to be forgetting is that when Christ brings in the kingdom, He is destroying the whole statue not just the feet and toes. Dan. 2:44-45 - (words in parenthesis mine) "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, (the millennial kingdom) which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.
45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; ( the whole statue ) the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure."

How does this happen? Just because an empire is no more it doesn’t mean it’s people are wiped off the face of the earth. Babylon is Iraq and it will become a force to be reckoned with. Persia is Iran and the major enemy of Israel. Greece is still a nation but in regards to this prophecy we need to think Syria, not modern day Greece. One of Alexander’s four generals controlled the area of Greece and he sent out the Syrian, Antiochus Eppiphanes to destroy Judaism, who as we know is a “type” for the a/c. The fourth kingdom of Rome was two legs, Western Rome and Eastern Rome. Everyone assumes a “revised western Rome” when they should consider a “revised eastern Rome”.

Israel was ruled by all these nations yet she continues to exist as does Syria and Turkey, the base of eastern Roman imperialism. The historical record shows that most of the armies that were under the banner of Rome at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD were composed of Turks, Syrians and Assyrians. It is my opinion that these four nations, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey will be part of the a/c’s ten-nation kingdom along with Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and either Libya or one of the nations south of Saudi Arabia.

This division may be a result of WW3 as depicted in the fourth seal. If there is a “fifth” kingdom depicted by the Dan. 2 statue, it is the whole statue, not just the toes. As vs. 43 shows, they may be combined, but they are not united (as one). Just as the a/c’s final kingdom will be.

 

[veteran]

The solution lies in the reality of a dual prophecy. One for Rome (the legs) and a future combination of the whole statue. What you both seem to be forgetting is that when Christ brings in the kingdom, He is destroying the whole statue not just the feet and toes.

No, I have not forgotten the fact that the WHOLE beast image statue is 'together' when Christ returns to strike it upon its feet, and the WHOLE (all FIVE pieces) come tumbling down. That has been my specific point... many times on this fourm about the concept of an inferred 5th beast kingdom for the very end of this world.

As for those who like to point to Rome with that, when they are actually pointing to the Roman Catholic CHRISTIAN Church, those doing that don't have a clue as to where the real powers are in today's Europe.

 

[teleiosis]

It's amazing how prescient you are in knowing what others know and don't know veteran. It's also slightly insulting that you give such low credit to those you oppose. Dealing with your allegations reminds me on how Obama attacked Romney, put the smear up and don't back down. You create your own strawman and then stand victorious in your own mind over it.

It's simple not the truth. It's the truth as you see it. Delving into power-driven arguments with you doesn't change anything. The fact that Rome became Christian has everything to do with Popes acting like God and determining Kingships and pedigrees. The fact that the nation-state rose out of feudalism and royalty changed that fundamental relationship to one where today, the RCC is the harlot sitting on top of the beast. However, we still have an unbroken line of Romanesque rule.

This Kingdom, refering back to the fourth iron Kingdom of Rome, then has something extrordinary go on within it. It has sizeable minority populations of a former enemy, the Muslim, living within it that doesn't mix. England has it. France has it, and Germany has it. Arabs are "mixed" in most of Europe and the funny thing is, is that they don't "mix" at all! In fact, they weaken the structure just like clay would do with iron.

In the present situation, we are ripe for the formation of the fourth terrible beast. Obama is bending to the will of Putin, and Europe is in chaos with the third Seal Spirit making economic life for a largely secular region, quite difficult. In this time of chaos, tyranny can advance. To have some respite, people will turn to forceful leaders who will "get things done." This is how a beast of a man can come to power. In this case, he will be preceded by ten ministers, but they are all of like mind.

Things are happening and prophecy is being fulfilled right before us. The Muslim brotherhood is uniting the "South," and the North is on the precipice of change.

Watch, and keep the faith.

 

[veteran]

It's amazing how prescient you are in knowing what others know and don't know veteran. It's also slightly insulting that you give such low credit to those you oppose. Dealing with your allegations reminds me on how Obama attacked Romney, put the smear up and don't back down. You create your own strawman and then stand victorious in your own mind over it.

It's simple not the truth. It's the truth as you see it. Delving into power-driven arguments with you doesn't change anything. The fact that Rome became Christian has everything to do with Popes acting like God and determining Kingships and pedigrees. The fact that the nation-state rose out of feudalism and royalty changed that fundamental relationship to one where today, the RCC is the harlot sitting on top of the beast. However, we still have an unbroken line of Romanesque rule.

This Kingdom, refering back to the fourth iron Kingdom of Rome, then has something extrordinary go on within it. It has sizeable minority populations of a former enemy, the Muslim, living within it that doesn't mix. England has it. France has it, and Germany has it. Arabs are "mixed" in most of Europe and the funny thing is, is that they don't "mix" at all! In fact, they weaken the structure just like clay would do with iron.

In the present situation, we are ripe for the formation of the fourth terrible beast. Obama is bending to the will of Putin, and Europe is in chaos with the third Seal Spirit making economic life for a largely secular region, quite difficult. In this time of chaos, tyranny can advance. To have some respite, people will turn to forceful leaders who will "get things done." This is how a beast of a man can come to power. In this case, he will be preceded by ten ministers, but they are all of like mind.

Things are happening and prophecy is being fulfilled right before us. The Muslim brotherhood is uniting the "South," and the North is on the precipice of change.

Watch, and keep the faith.

What is insulting is the many false doctrines people come here with when the times we're in today are plainly laid bare! One world government is the aim today and has been for quite some time now, and it was prophesied, shown to us about the final beast kingdom that's to manifest on this earth just prior to Christ's return. It's laid out plainly in Rev.13.

Yet many still would rather follow a bunch of junk doctrines pushed by the religous organizations of men instead, and a lot of those junk doctrines are designed by the very bunch that are pulling the strings, and boy do they hate the Roman Church, simply because the Roman Church executed many of their occultic leaders in past history in Europe, including the head of the Knights Templars, and then forced the rest of them into exile.

 

[Richard Neal]

What is insulting is the many false doctrines people come here with when the times we're in today are plainly laid bare! One world government is the aim today and has been for quite some time now, and it was prophesied, shown to us about the final beast kingdom that's to manifest on this earth just prior to Christ's return. It's laid out plainly in Rev.13.

Yet many still would rather follow a bunch of junk doctrines pushed by the religous organizations of men instead, and a lot of those junk doctrines are designed by the very bunch that are pulling the strings, and boy do they hate the Roman Church, simply because the Roman Church executed many of their occultic leaders in past history in Europe, including the head of the Knights Templars, and then forced the rest of them into exile.

Show me exactly where a "one world government" is prophesied in Scripture...Hal Lindsey and others have been speaking about this for decades, but I can't find it myself in Scripture...Because it simply doesn't exist...Many interpret Scripture with their preconceived beliefs in mind and bend Scripture to fit those preconceived thoughts and beliefs...That is why you and others continue to force a quasi-revised Roman Empire into your interpretations and come up so empty...The Soviet Union is no more thus it can not be Gog of the land of Magog, Roman Catholicism is not the harlot of the book of Revelation - nor can you prove that it is, the Antichrist will not come out of the EU (European Union)...