The Three Beasts in Revelation

[Guestman]

Hi Guestman,


If what you suggest is accurate, then verse 41 is incorrect in assigning the Feet and Toes as a distinct "kingdom"; verse 45 is incorrect in depicting FIVE world empires by separating the clay from the iron, by the insertion of the bronze between them; and history is incorrect in yielding a FIFTH empire era where world power is "divided" between THREE SUPERPOWERS, and a FOURTH ONE-WORLD-GOVERNMENT.

Dan. 2
41 And as you saw the feet and toes partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom
45 ... the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver and the gold ... = 4,3,5,2,1 = FIVE

Per the above, if the verse 45, 4,3,5,2,1 = FIVE significance is not as proposed, then please provide an alternate explanation for this Scriptural Intelligent Design.




If the "bear" is Medo/Persia, then perhaps you can explain which three nations ("ribs") were NOT absorbed into the constituency of the "bear", but were simply gnawed on for some duration, after which they HAD TO BE DROPPED so that the "bear" could "arise and devour much flesh".









Do people just make this stuff up, to try and pull the wool over peoples eyes?!? We're not stupid. We've got history books.


With Best Regards,
DD

Of the "immense image" that Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar (II) saw, the "chest and its arms....of silver" pictured Medo-Persia. On the night of October 5, 539 B.C.E, the Medo-Persian armies under the command of Cyrus the Great, by diverting the waters from the Euphrates River into trenches while the city of Babylon was in a festive mood, was able to conquer it.


The soldiers waded up an almost empty river bed, whereby "the gates will not be shut" and catching the guards unaware of an attack.(Isa 45:1) Medo-Persia is also seen at Daniel 8: "In the third year of the kingship of King Bel·shaz′zar (553 B.C.E.), a vision appeared to me, Daniel, after the one that appeared to me previously.....As I raised my eyes, look! there was a ram standing before the watercourse, and it had two horns. The two horns were tall, but one was higher than the other, and the higher one came up later."(Dan 8:1, 3)


This ' two horned ram ' is explained as: "The two-horned ram that you (Daniel) saw stands for the kings of Me′di·a and Persia."(Dan 8:20) Thus, Medo-Persia was powered by two "kings", but one exercised more authority than the other, for "one was higher than the other, and the higher one came up later."


This rulership arrangement started with Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Great and ended with Darius III in 331 B.C.E. when Alexander the Great overthrew the Medo-Persian empire at Gaugamela, near ancient Nineveh, defeating Darius III and his army of 1 million fighting men.


The symbolic bear of Medo-Persia was ‘raised up on one side,’ perhaps to get ready to attack and subdue nations and thus maintain world power. Or this position may have been intended to show that the Persian line of rulers would gain the ascendancy over the sole Median king, Darius.


The three ribs between the bear’s teeth could denote the three directions in which it pushed its conquests. The Medo-Persian “bear” went to the north to seize Babylon in 539 B.C.E. Then it went westward through Asia Minor and into Thrace (southeastern Europe or part of Greece, Bulgaria and Turkey). Finally, the “bear” went to the south to conquer Egypt. Since the number three at times symbolizes intensity, the three ribs may also emphasize the symbolic bear’s greed for conquest.

 

[shturt678]

I am not suggesting anything, for the book of Daniel speaks only of four metals (gold, silver, copper, and iron), but also attaches "clay to the iron", in which clay is not a metal, but an addition. This does not impact the fact that five world powers are seen here.

The problem with most is that they are unable to discern who "the toes of the feet (that ) were partly of iron and partly of clay" being spoken at Daniel 2:41-43. For example, in giving several illustrations at Matthew 13, Jesus used the Greek word syniemi five different times (Matt 13:13-15, 19, 23, 51), that means "to mentally put the pieces together." Jesus said that his genuine disciples would have access to this knowledge telling them: "To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted."(Matt 13:11)

Daniel 2:41 shows that from the dissolution of the Roman Empire (in 476 C.E.) came forth another "kingdom" (through a series of "events" that formed the Holy Roman Empire), also "divided, but some of the hardness of iron will be in it." This "kingdom" will not have the strength that Rome had (Dan 2:40), for with the addition of "clay" in the mixture, it loses some strength.

This "clay" is "the people" that now make known their voice for change within the government, causing fracturing, unlike Rome that quickly disposed of any dissenters within its empire. The "people....will not stick together, one to the other, just as iron does not mix with clay."(Dan 2:43) Hence, "the kingdom will be partly strong and partly fragile."(Dan 2:42) This "kingdom" is now alive and active as the Anglo-American dual world power.

Thank you for caring! At least we're on the same page pretty much.

Dan.2:41-43, v.43, "....so shall they be mixed together by the seed of men;..." The iron is obviously the old Roman stock, the clay representing the more fragile Germanic and other peoples who were at that time, not such good material for empire building. All four empires ("Kingdoms") being the theme setting the ground work for the "Kingdom of God."



Daniel 2:45 is another "kingdom" that God has set up, and is not a political world power. Daniel 2 outlines the world powers that started with ancient Babylon in 632 B.C.E and ends with the destruction of the final one, Britain/America.

Daniel 2:44 says that "In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever."

Thus, the "kingdom" that came forth from the "legs of iron" (Rome), the Anglo-American world power, will not pass off the scene of its own accord, but will be "alive" (Rev 19:20b), actively promoting its own nationalistic interests and controlling importance in world affairs, when it is wiped off the face of the earth by another "kingdom" (along with all other political governments and agencies), God's kingdom that "the God of heaven set up" in 1914.(Rev 16:14, 16)

Hence, at Daniel 2:45, it further says that "just as you saw that out of the mountain a stone was cut not by hands, and that it crushed the iron, the copper, the clay, the silver, and the gold. The Grand God has made known to the king what will happen in the future. The dream is true, and its interpretation is trustworthy.”

This "stone....cut not hands (or through politics)" is God's heavenly kingdom

My end main point: Great! "Stone" = "Christ's Kingdom"

or government, that will soon take decisive action against all human political governments, crushing them out of existence. Jesus taught us to pray for that "Kingdom to come".(Matt 6:10) Daniel 2 speaks of five human rulerships and one heavenly one.

Old Jack

 

[DaDad]

Hi Floyd,

Clearly; you have 5 on the brain both in Dan.2; and in Alexander's Generals!

Clearly you have confused me with GOD and HISTORY:


GOD says :

Dan. 2
41 And as you saw the feet and toes partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom
45 ... the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver and the gold ... = 4,3,5,2,1 = FIVE


And on a different subject, HISTORY says:

Alexander's empire was NOT divided between four generals, -- but rather FIVE:

1. Antipater taking Macedonia and Greece,
2. Lysimachus Thrace
3. Antigonus Asia Minor
4. Seleucus Babylonea
5. Ptolemy Egypt

“There were not only three major monarchies -- Macedonia, Seleucia, and Egypt; there were a hundred Greek city-states, of all degrees of independence; there was a maze of alliances and leagues; there were half-Greek states in Epirus, Judea, Pergamum, Byzantium, Bithynia, Cappadocia, Galatia, Bactria; and in the west were Greek Italy and Sicily, torn between aging Carthage and youthful Rome. ...(Alexander) had left not one but several strong men behind him, and none could be content with less than sovereignty. ... After some minor trials at arms which disposed of lesser contenders, they divided the empire into five parts -- Antipater taking Macedonia and Greece, Lysimachus Thrace, Antigonus Asia Minor, Seleucus Babylonea, and Ptolemy Egypt.”[1]



[SIZE=8pt][1][/SIZE] [SIZE=12pt]Durant, Will, “[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]Story of Civilization: Part I,” Simon and Schuster, NY, 1954[/SIZE], pp. 557-558




Do you accuse GOD and HISTORY of being CRAZY? Do you refute both GOD and HISTORY, or are you simply having a difficult day?!?

With Best Regards,
DD




Hi Guestman,

"The two-horned ram that you (Daniel) saw stands for the kings of Me′di·a and Persia."

The Medo/Persian Empire has NEVER had a dual monarchy. So there NEVER were two horns for that empire. Perhaps there is a different explanation for this Ram, and the subsequent He-Goat.

The three ribs between the bear’s teeth could denote the three directions in which it pushed its conquests.

Dan. 8:9
... which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the glorious land.

You're making stuff up. If GOD wanted to cite three directions, HE would have cited three directions. However, if there are three nations which have been gnawed on for some significant duration and then dropped to arise and devour much flesh, then I'm quite certain that sequence matches history.

Perhaps you should start at the foundational Dan. 2:45 FIVE world empire scenario, and proceed from there.


With Best Regards,
DD

 

[RANDOR]

Wow..............my hats off to you guys....truly amazing.....the studies you provide.

Reminds me of an ongoing chess game

By the way............I'm terrible at chess....but love to play it.

 

[shturt678]

Wow..............my hats off to you guys....truly amazing.....the studies you provide.

Reminds me of an ongoing chess game

By the way............I'm terrible at chess....but love to play it.

Thank you for caring for sure!

Decades ago, we would spend from early in the morning till about 1 P.M in Church on Sunday then busy all week due to so many cared about the Cross - I'm an old man and cannot wait to croak, basically due to most could care less and have Church reduced to a whole "1" hour on Sunday with a sign on their home "don't bother me during the week as I have given a lot of money to the Church last Sunday."

You and other posters care where in my community, they even could care less less and less - Thank you!

Old Jack that appreciates you good folks agreeing to disagree of course most of the time - doesn't make me correct.

 

[Guestman]

Hi Guestman,





Perhaps you could provide a historical citation which documents your parallel Ruler assertion.


550–530 Cyrus II the Great
529–522 Cambyses II
522 Bardiya (Smerdis)
521–486 Darius I the Great
485–465 Xerxes I the Great
465–424 Artaxerxes I Longimanus
424 Xerxes II
424–423 Sogdianus
423–405 Darius II of Persia
404–359 Artaxerxes II Mnemon
358–338 Artaxerxes III Ochus
338–336 Artaxerxes IV Arses
336–330 Darius III
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaemenid_Empire

Per the above, I only find a series of rulers, with NO parallel rulers.




And finally, you did not respond to my query regarding the distinction between the seven heads/diadems, versus the ten horns/diadems:

Rev. 12:3
3 And another portent appeared in heaven; behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads.

Rev. 13:1
And I saw a beast rising out of the sea, with ten horns and seven heads, with ten diadems upon its horns and a blasphemous name upon its heads.


Please explain how/why the diadems transitioned from the seven heads / seven diadems to the ten horns / ten diadems, -- and why the order changed from heads/horns to horns/heads.





Do people just make this stuff up, to try and pull the wool over peoples eyes?!? We're not stupid. We've got history books.


With Best Regards,
DD

Many seems to think that Wikipedia is the "last word" on a subject, when just about anyone can post or make alterations to a Wikipedia article. To accept a Wiki article without digging deeper (and a lot do little to no serious research of the Bible, but profess to be "Christian") is being a bit naive.(see Prov 14:15)


Now, onto the subject at hand. Cyrus the Great (Persian) ruled jointly with Darius the Mede. (Dan 5:31) And I must admit an oversight, that when Cyrus the Great began ruling (560/559 [Olympiad 55] - 531/530 B.C.E., Olympiad 62), and later in combination with Media, I meant to say that Persia exercised more authority than Media, not the other way around.


In a vision in the year 553 B.C.E. (Dan 8:1), the prophet Daniel sees that "there was a ram standing before the watercourse, and it had two horns. The two horns were tall, but one was higher than the other, and the higher one came up later."(Dan 8:3)


This "ram" pictured Medo-Persia (with Persia being the higher horn or more dominate government for a while who "came up later" of the two), for a voice says: "Ga′bri·el, make that one understand what he saw.....The two-horned ram that you saw stands for the kings of Me′di·a and Persia."(Dan 8:16, 20)


Thus, Medo-Persia (both were once part of Iran, with Media in the northwestern portion and Persia just below it, holding to the southwestern part of the Iranian plateau) was noted as one animal, a "ram" with two horns (not one), two governments with kings (Media even had more than one "king" ruling when Babylon was overthrown, Jer 25:25; 51:11, 28) that worked together for a "common cause", to widen out their empire.


This divisionary government or sets of government continued to function together until Alexander the Great defeated Darius III in 331 B.C.E.. for Daniel 8 says that after the "ram" with "two horns" (not one horn) was "standing before the watercourse....making thrusts to the west (toward Thrace and Asia Minor) and to the north (toward Babylon in 539 B.C.E.) and to the south (toward Egypt)."(Dan 8:3, 4)


Then "there was a male goat (Alexander the Great of Greece, reigned 336 - 323 B.C.E., dying at 32 years old) coming from the west (Macedonia).....And it was coming toward the ram (Medo-Persia) with two horns."(Dan 8:5, 6) Though nothing is mentioned in history regarding the Medes of Darius the Mede (who died in about 537/536 B.C.E. after ruling Babylon for less than 2 years) and after, still down to the rulership of king Ahasuerus, there was still a divisionary governmental arrangement between the Medes and Persians. But it need be remembered that at Daniel 8:3, the Median governmental position was the ' lower horn' or one that was subservient to Persia.


Esther 1 says that "in the third year of his (Ahasuerus, believed to be Xerxes I, son of Darius the Great [Darius Hystaspis]) reign (496 - 474 B.C.E.), he held a banquet for all his princes and his servants. The army of Persia and Me′di·a, the nobles, and the princes of the provinces were before him......and those closest to him were Car·she′na, She′thar, Ad·ma′tha, Tar′shish, Me′res, Mar·se′na, and Me·mu′can, seven princes of Persia and Me′di·a, who had access to the king and who occupied the highest positions in the kingdom."(Es 1:3, 14) Medo-Persia was noted as being ' one kingdom', not two. Hence, after the death of Darius the Mede, only Persian rulers are mentioned, but there was still a common bond between Persia and Media, that created a dual arrangement.


Even the Anglo-American dual world power is noted as being a "kingdom" (singular, Dan 2:41), in which America can be noted as the "higher horn....that came up later" between it and Britain, attaining to great clout in the world's political arena and America's currency is the top currency in the world, being called the "reserve currency" of the world.

Persian Kings Mentioned in Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther:


Reign (B.C.E.) Secular Name Bible Name Scripture
Reference
c. 550-529 Cyrus the Great Cyrus Ezra 1:1; 4:5
529-522 Cambyses II Ahasuerus Ezra 4:6
522 (8 months) Gaumata (Smerdis) Artaxerxes Ezra 4:7-23
521-486 Darius I Darius Ezra 4:5, 24;
6:1-15
486-474 Xerxes I Ahasuerus Book of Esther
474-423 Artaxerxes I Artaxerxes Ezra 6:14;
(Longimanus) 7:1-26;
Nehemiah 2:1-18


And, yes, I did respond "regarding the distinction between the seven heads/diadems, versus the ten horns/diadems:" in an earlier post, but you, in your haste to discredit what had been written, failed to see it. And it need be noted that the truth of Bible accounts is not dependent upon secular sources.

 

[DaDad]

Hi Guestman,

Cyrus the Great (Persian) ruled jointly with Darius the Mede. (Dan 5:31)

I can certainly understand where and why you have this mistaken impression, but both Scripture and History provide otherwise:

Daniel 9
9 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasu-e′rus, by birth a Mede, who became king over the realm of the Chalde′ans

The realm of the Chaldeans is NOT the Medo/Persian Empire, as a GOVERNOR may be appointed over a realm, but a KING is a Sovereign authority. Thus Darius was the last KING over the Babylonian Empire.


Daniel 5
30 That very night Belshaz′zar the Chalde′an king was slain. 31 And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.

The idiot son Belshazzar declared a feast. Did he send messengers for help? Did he attempt to raise an army? Did he do anything to preserve the Kingdom and the lives of it's inhabitants? NO! So who killed Belshazzar?? -- The nobles, who wanted to preserve their financial interests, and lives.

Furthermore, in selecting a new King they chose a man with Median heritage, attempting to assuage Cyrus' hegemony.


Daniel 6
3 Then this Daniel became distinguished above all the other presidents and satraps, because an excellent spirit was in him; and the king planned to set him over the whole kingdom.

After the nobles killed Belshazzar, they expected to have significant influence, but those plans were thwarted by Daniel's presence, -- which Darius recognized and came to greatly depend upon. So the nobles conspired against Daniel, whose life was preserved, but Darius was so enraged in his already fragile future, that he fasted all night and then threw the nobles and their families in to the pit.


Daniel 6
28 So this Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian.

There are TWO reigns specified. The first is under Darius the Babylonian, and the second is under Cyrus the Persian (singular). Otherwise Scripture would have said under the reigns of Darius, and Cyrus, the Persians (plural).



And finally, where the final days of the city of Babylon are lost to history, after being encircled by the Medo/Persian army, so too this Darius the Mede is lost to history. But the conquests, participants, dates, and specifics of the Medo/Persian Empire are replete, -- without ANY reference to a Medo/Persian "Darius the Mede" either in context with that history, or in specific citation.

And what conquering general would appoint some castrated Jewish slave into such a high position after ~two weeks~ of governorship, and fast all night long in concern over Daniel's precarious circumstance? And what victorious general would need to be "strengthened" (Dan. 11;2)? But certainly the last Babylonian King would certainly want to know that the fall of the empire is GOD's will, and that he was not alone in his circumstance.



With Best Regards,
DD



PS Your "response" to the "distinction between the seven heads/diadems, versus the ten horns/diadems" was incomplete at best:

With the seven heads of the political "wild beast" each having "diadems' on each horn represents that each government exercises their own power or authority, such as Britain has its own governmental arrangement (considered a monarchy) while the U.S. has its own political setup (called a democratic system), having each their own royal authority, but working together as "one".

You did not explain why in Rev. 12, the heads had diadems, and what transpired such that in Rev. 13, the horns now had the diadems. Perhaps you could start by identifying who/what are the seven heads, and why they even HAD diadems; and then identify who/what are the ten horns, and why THEY had diadems.

Otherwise, it would appear that your solution is a confusion of "explanation", -- also known as ~handwavium~.

 

[shturt678]

Thank you folks for caring!

I never knew we would have to agree to disagree so much???

Only the tip of the iceberg, eg, letting alone the renditions of the inferior A.V. regarding Dan.5:2-6:1 and the very inferior Wiki, will only say the truth of the matter is that on the night when Belshazzar was slain, Cyrus actually took the city and then very naturally as a direct sequence of this gave the rule of the Chaldean kingdom (Dan.9:1) to this subordinate of his, Darius the Mede, then, chapter 5 should close with the report concerning this adjustment. BTW the German rendering of this passage is right on.

Only insignificant old Jack's very very inferior opinion

 

[Guestman]

DaDad,

This is to just finalize concerning the dual arrangement of the Medo/Persian empire and never was it said that any Median king followed Darius the Mede, but that Media and Persia were consorts. On the night of October 5, 539 B.C.E., Daniel was called before Belshazzar to interpret the riddle of the "handwriting on the wall".

After refusing Belshazzar's gifts, and then showing Belshazzar's arrogancy against Jehovah God, Daniel nows says: "So the hand was sent from him, and this writing was inscribed. And this is the writing that was inscribed: ME′NE, ME′NE, TE′KEL, and PAR′SIN. (Aramaic, meaning literally, "a mina, a mina, a shekel, and a half shekel")......PE′RES, your kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and the Persians."(Dan 5:24, 25, 28)

Thus, Daniel told Belshazzar that his Babylonian kingdom would very soon be "divided and given to the Medes and the Persians." Daniel 5:31 establishes that Darius the Mede took over the reigns of Babylon, though through Cyrus, Persia was the "higher (horn that ) came up later."(Dan 8:3) Persia was the dominate "kingdom" of the two, so that Media was not mentioned on the same level as Persia after the death of Darius the Mede.

The Medo-Persian empire remained intact until Alexander the Great defeated it in 331 B.C.E. Daniel 8 shows that to be the case, for when "a male goat" (Greece under the reign of Alexander the Great) "struck down the ram and broke its two horns, and the ram was powerless to stand up to it."(Dan 8:7)

In the Bible book of Isaiah, it prophetically says: "This is what Jehovah says to his anointed one, to Cyrus (the Persian), whose right hand I have taken hold of to subdue nations before him, to disarm kings, to open before him the double doors, so that the gates will not be shut."(Isa 45:1) Though nothing is stated concerning Media here, the Scriptures establish that it did play a part in the downfall of ancient Babylon and was a dual arrangement with Persia.(Dan 5:31)

Following the death of Cyrus in 530 B.C.E., Cambyses II (Cyrus son) took control of the Persian Empire and after his death in 522 B.C.E., Darius Hystaspis (whose father was Hystaspis, a Persian noble) took over the reigns of the Persian kingdom (by defeating Gaumata or possibly Bardiya), with Media as an "attachment" or in the background. As has been stated, the truth of the Bible is not dependent upon secular sources.

I see no need to go any further, for the topic is about the "beasts of Revelation". You can then discuss this with others, as I do not engage in debates.(1 Tim 2:8; 2 Tim 2:23)