I'm sorry, you are right.
The beasts in chapter seven mirror the metal man of Daniel two starting from the Medio- Persian empire ie, the arms and chest of silver. The descriptions of these beasts give us more detail than the metal man in Daniel 2.
- The fourth beast is Imperial Rome but it goes further as the authority of the forth beast was taken over by Ecclesiastical Rome which then dominated the landscape in the known World for over 1200 years. Ecclesiastical Rome's authority was overthrown in 1798 when the Pope was taken captive and died in captivity.
This fourth beast (imperial Rome) which has morphed in Ecclesiastical Rome is then further elaborated on in the book of Revelation where it resurfaces after it appeared to be conquered.
I have kept this post short intentionally so as not to snow you or get bogged down with protracted detail.
Well, thanks for responding. Based on your response I understand that you are an SDA member. I am familiar with your views on Daniel and believe that no other Christian organization has done more to properly interpret the book of Daniel than the SDA, however, they really have not made any changes to their interpretations for quite a while. And although they quickly contend they are open to other interpretations, I have found they are absolutely not. They are quite proud of their interpretations and have no interest in changing them. And to be fair, it is most likely because they have put so much effort and time in studying Daniel - literally going through each verse, each word, etc., rather than accept another's set of interpretations. And today, with the exception of your church, that is exactly what is found in today's understanding of Daniel - they represent those scholars, theologians and academics of the past 200 years who have published their interpretations and are now taught in seminaries, schools, churche, etc. Nothing new under the sun for some time now.
But even the SDA interpretation model is not totally accurate. They have indeed captured most of Daniel and even identified the transistion from pagan Rome and its demise in 476 AD and its being replaced by the Christian church that would become known as Papal Rome headed by the little horn. And to be candid, that is the most important part of the prophecy - Jesus came to establish His earthly church and then we have His church become terribly corrupted with paganism and traditions, etc.
And as Daniel mentions, this 4th beast headed by the little horn will continue until the end of time - and we are indeed very close to the end. But almost all contend that Daniel is mostly an end time series of prophecies. And that is due to just how complicated the book of Daniel is....since they cannot match many of the actors or events in our history books to those verses in Daniel, then they contend they must be future events and belong in the end times.
But getting back to the interpretations, I would like you to consider that the 1260 year prophecy that you (and everyone else) that is a conversion from the time element in 7:25 (time, times and 1/2 time) does not point to 1798 when Napoleon removed the Pope from his throne for a short term.
1) In all of the 5 time elements found in Daniel, not one should be converted to or apply the "year for a day" principle." Each of the 5 time elements speak to its own prophetic meaning.
2) But I am not mentioning all of this (without support) in an attempt to convert you.... or try to make you agree with my interpretation. Rather, it is to continue with a discussion on the most complicated book in Scripture (by far.... even Revelation is simple compared to Daniel, but that is largely due to having to know what Daniel carries forward to Revelation).
3) Since you understand the powerful Christian church did replace Imperial Rome after their demise, and you understand the Christian church was appropriated by the then most powerful bishop of Rome who became known as the Pope or papacy and thus the church would become known as Papal Rome, you might want to ask that as this final beast continues over the centuries, and is certainly the main actor until the time of the end, then what is the "deadly wound?" Would it not make sense that it would have to refer to this individual?
And it does but it is not the "secular" event that the SDA contends it is... nothing to do with any secular power or nation....
a) Could the deadly wound actually be the "reformation?" And if it is, and I certainly believe it is, then we can also identify just who the "earth beast" is in Revelation. Can only be one actor.
This is just to continue the Daniel discussion....thanks.
