Your Weekly Dose of Polemical Commentary, Courtesy of Daniel 7

The following is an excerpt from my brief commentary on the major prophecies in the book of Daniel, written sometime in 2023. I'll copy-paste the conclusion right here, as a summary:

Considered deeply, Daniel 7 is the sort of chapter to give you grey hairs — respectable, colourless strands to which you should point with a sigh of contentment. You may disagree with the details of what I have said, but you should carefully consider v13-14 before claiming that the kingdom is not yet established.

Daniel 7

The vision of Daniel 7 lends itself to extremes of treatment: fools tread upon it with misplaced confidence, appealing passionately to the nooks and crannies of its detailed illustration in justification of their view; and faithful expositors, in a genuine attempt not to miss the wood for the trees, often find themselves disregarding the trees altogether. It’s a “these you ought to have done without neglecting the others” situation. In the following discussion, I hope to avoid both ditches — by not only painting the larger portrait of this chapter, but also remembering to give it some eyebrows and a nose.

To remain faithful to the text, we will stick closely to the interpretations provided by the angel throughout the chapter. In doing this, we cannot stray too far from the intended meaning.

Overview

Importantly, the vision is portrayed from Daniel’s perspective. As the first verse repeats emphatically, it was his dream, of his head, on his bed. He is the representative of his people (9:3-5, 6:10) and so the narration of events in this chapter mirrors the point of view of the Jews in the land of Israel. He is experiencing their future plight (see v21).

Since we are in ‘overview mode’, note the clear structure of the chapter, following a consistent cycle of beasts → judgement → kingdom:

1. The Vision (v2-14):

   1. The Four Beasts (v2-8): These represent the empires of (1) Babylon, (2) Medo-Persia, (3) Greece, and (4) Rome — similar to the kingdoms in Daniel 2.

   2. The Judgement (v9-12): This section describes the divine judgement that precedes the establishment of God’s kingdom.

   3. The Kingdom (v13-14): The Son of Man is brought before the Ancient of Days to receive the kingdom, which will never be destroyed.

2. The Interpretation (v17-18):

   1. The Four Beasts (v17): The angel reiterates that these beasts symbolise four kings or kingdoms.

   2. The Judgement (v18a): The kingdom is taken from the beasts.

   3. The Kingdom (v18b): The saints possess the kingdom forever.

3. Recounting The Fourth Beast (v19-22):

   1. The Fourth Beast (v19-21): The beast is notably different and terrifying, and the usurping little horn persecutes the saints.

   2. The Judgement (v22a): Judgement was granted to the saints against the little horn.

   3. The Kingdom (v22b): The time came that the saints would possess the kingdom.

4. Interpreting The Fourth Beast (v23-27):

   1. The Fourth Beast (v23-25): The angel explains that the little horn will wage persecution against the saints for “time, times, and half a time.”

   2. The Judgement (v26): The judgement will sit, and the little horn’s dominion will be destroyed.

   3. The Kingdom (v27): The kingdom that will be given to the saints is an everlasting kingdom.

As you can see, Daniel 7 repeats a pattern in which each segment progresses from the rulership of the beasts, through divine judgement, to the establishment of God’s kingdom. This is crucial. The beasts (v2-8) are interpreted by the angel in v17; in the same way, the divine judgement (v9-12) and establishment of the kingdom (v13-14) are interpreted in v18. Let me repeat that for my premillennial readers: v18 is the interpretation of v9-14.

The Kingdom

When do the kingdom scenes begin historically (v13-14, v18, v22b, v27)? Contrary to futurist ideas, the text depicts the inauguration of God’s kingdom at Christ’s ascension:

I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. (Daniel 7:13-14)

According to Daniel 7, therefore, Christ’s kingdom began when he ascended to heaven—when he came “to the Ancient of days.” That is when he was given dominion, and glory, and a kingdom. That is when the kingdom of chapter 2 is established. Indeed, the language is so similar to what we have already seen in chapter 2, that Robert Roberts said it was “an explanation of chap. ii. 44” (Christendom Astray, p 196, emphasis added). I agree that 7:13 explains 2:44, but this certainly doesn’t help the Christadelphian position!

Indeed, many Christadelphian writers cite these verses as if they prove a future establishment of the kingdom, without addressing what is painfully obvious—that the event immediately before the kingdom is the ascension of Christ! It’s enough to draw from my lips a perplexed “guys have you even read the verse??” — yes, I put two question marks there. (See Elpis Israel, p 345; Christ on Earth Again, p 36; Wrested Scriptures, p 93-94; Herald of the Kingdom and Age to Come, 1860, p 279; What Is The Truth?, p 32). H. P. Mansfield acknowledges that the “dominion” was given to Christ at his ascension, but gives very little comment on the “kingdom” that goes along with it (Daniel Expositor, p 165).

Once we understand that Daniel 7:13 refers to the ascension of Christ, we must also understand the angel’s interpretation of that part of the vision in a similar light. In other words, when the angel says “the saints of the most high shall possess the kingdom” (v18), he is simply “making known the interpretation” of v13-14. Upon this basis, it is quite clear that the Kingdom of God was established and given to the saints at the ascension of Christ.

To be more precise, however, we should bear in mind the Lord’s quotation of v13 in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24:30). According to him, the judgements of 70 AD were the vindication of his ascension and kingship—“the sign” that he had ascended to heaven. This is what parousia (“coming”, Matt 24:3) meant to the Jews: it was the public revealing of their Messiah. Christ’s argument is that his ascension and vindication as the all-powerful ruler of heaven and earth is when men would “see” the power of his kingship, and the establishment of his kingdom.

Now, yet again, I feel I must emphasise the fact that the Kingdom of God does not fill the earth immediately — it would not “immediately appear”. In fact, we are explicitly told that it starts as small as a stone (Dan 2:34) — or a mustard seed (Matt 13:31-32) — and grows over time to fill the earth. This is why Daniel 7:14 does not say that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him at once. Rather, these are promised to him as a future result of the dominion and kingdom—“And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him.”

I have now painted the overall portrait of Daniel 7. What, then, of the ten horns, the little horn, the great judgement, and the “time, times, and half a time”?

The Horns

The ten horns are ten kings of the Roman beast. As such, they should be identified as the kings of the Roman Empire that ruled from the end of the Greek empire (v6) to the vindication of Christ’s ascension and kingship in AD 70 (v13-14). The Greek leopard-empire came to a close during the first century BC. It was around this time that Julius Caesar began centralising all Roman power in himself, declaring himself dictator for life. Counting from his rule, we find that there are ten Roman emperors:

1. Julius (49-44 BC).

2. Augustus (27 BC - 14 AD).

3. Tiberius (14-37 AD).

4. Caligula (37-41 AD).

5. Claudius (41-54 AD).

6. Nero (54-68 AD).

7. Galba (68-69 AD).

8. Otho (Jan-Apr 69 AD).

9. Vitellius (Apr-Dec 69 AD).

10. Vespasian (69-79 AD).

However, Daniel seems more interested in “another little horn” that comes up among them. It is objectively smaller than the others (because it is “little”), but it appears larger (v20). This implies that the little horn was closer at hand, making it look bigger; and it was more influential over Daniel and his people, even though it was objectively weaker.

So it is true to say that the little horn was, to Daniel, the face of the fourth beast. Indeed, for every other beast, he recognised it instantly as a lion, bear, or leopard. But the true character of the fourth beast — its face — is only made known to Daniel through the little horn, whose face he does see. This demonstrates that, to the Jews, the little horn was the face of Rome in their proximity.

The Little Horn

The historical fulfilment is the dynasty of Herods. Appointed and approved by Rome, the Herods were truly the face of Rome to the Jews. Although objectively weaker than any Caesar, they looked and felt much larger.

The New Testament depiction of the Herods could not be a better fit:

• The Herods are consistently referred to as “king” (Matt 2:1, 14:9, Lk 1:5, Acts 12:1, 25:3 etc).

• The Herods persecuted and killed the saints, including: Jesus (Matt 2:13-15, Lk 13:31, 23:6-12), John the Baptist (Mk 6:17-28), James (Acts 12:1-2), Peter (Acts 12:3-4), Paul (Acts 25-26), and many others (see Acts 12:1).

• The Herods had mouths speaking great things against the Most High. This is particularly stark when Agrippa I “made an oration” and the people declared “it is the voice of a god” (Acts 12:21-22, see also Lk 23:11).

The interpretation of the little horn as Herod also has the benefit of consistency with Daniel 2. In  chapter 2, we saw that there were four empires, and that the fourth (Rome) was mixed with clay (Israel). Now in chapter 7, there are again four empires, and the fourth (Rome) has this Jewish Herodian element, depicted by the little horn.

Herod was both a vassal of Rome, and a Jew. On the one hand, we see him “made friends together” with Pilate (Lk 23:12); but we also see him as part of the Jewish apostasy, listed along with the Pharisees (Matt 22:15-16, Mk 3:6, 12:13).

History records that the Herods were religiously Jewish, but racially Edomite. Now, in the Bible, Edomites are both “brothers” (Deut 23:7) and enemies (Psa 137:7) of the Jews. Thus, Herod represents the intersection of the Jews and the enemies of God’s people. Stay with me here; this is fascinating.

You see, there are several Old Testament characters who seem to foreshadow Herod the Little Horn:

• Doeg was an Edomite who worked for Saul against David, and hotly persecuted the priests of Yahweh (1 Sam 21:7, 22:9-19). Psalm 52, which was written about Doeg the Edomite (Psa 52:0), uses very Daniel 7-like language to describe him: “Why boastest thou thyself in mischief… Thy tongue deviseth mischiefs… Thou lovest all devouring words, O thou deceitful tongue... God shall likewise destroy thee for ever… and root thee out of the land of the living.”

• Haman was an Agagite, or rather, an Amalekite. The Amalekites were Edomites, being descended from Esau (Gen 36:12). Haman was known for his persecution of the Jews (Est 3:6,10). He boasted his own pride and importance above God’s (Est 5:11). He sought to change set-times and decrees (Est 3:12). Interestingly, when Haman is defeated, his ten sons are hanged along with him (Est 9:13-14).

• Rabshakeh, while representing the Assyrian army, was likely a Jew, since he knew “the Jews’ language” and the details of Jewish worship (2 Kgs 18:25-26). The Talmud takes this view, and many commentators since. If ever a man spoke “great words” against God and his people, this was he. 2 Kings 19:22 records God’s response to his words: “Whom hast thou reproached and blasphemed? And against whom has thou exalted thy voice, and lifted up thine eyes on high? Even against the Holy One of Israel.”

The New Testament fulfils this type with the dynasty of Herods—who were both Jews and Edomites; who boasted against God; who persecuted the saints; who were destroyed by God.

The Details

If the Herods fulfil the prophecy of the Little Horn, then there are a few more details to address from Daniel 7, particularly v24-26. First, the fact that the little horn arose “after” the ten kings can be understood by the fact that the dynasty of Herods began after the dynasty of Roman Emperors began. Second, we are told that when they came to power, they would “subdue three kings” (v24). 

To understand this, we must remember that the subduing power of the little horn is primarily in its mouth (v8,11,20,25), and that its size and authority only appeared great from the perspective of Daniel — and thus, his people (v20). Historically, the Herods were known for being astute politicians with silver tongues. It was through their smart politicking that they secured kingship over Judea from the Caesars: Herod the Great’s rule was solidified under Augustus Caesar (one); Herod Antipas maintained his tetrarchy during the reign of Tiberius Caesar (two); and Herod Agrippa I’s kingship over Judea was expanded by Claudius Caesar (three). This, I take it, is what is meant by the subduing of the three horns. It must be understood from the perspective of Daniel’s people in Israel, and through the power of the tongue.

We are told that the little horn tried to change “times and laws” (v25), which is an unfortunate translation. The word “time” means ‘an appointed time’ (see BDB, Strong’s). The same word is used in v22: “the appointed time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.” The word “law” means ‘a decree’ (see BDB, Strong’s), and is used as such in Daniel 2:9,13 etc. Thus, the meaning of the phrase is that the Herods would try to prevent appointed time from arriving, and the decree of God from eventuating, because the fulfilment of these things would mark the end of their reign. They were themselves “kings of the Jews” (Lk 1:5), so it is not surprising that they felt threatened by the real “King of the Jews” (Matt 2:2), and attempted to rid the world of its Messiah.  Hence, I understand that the Herods wanted to change God’s appointed time for the Messiah to come, when he would wrest the kingdom out of the hands of men and give it to his saints.

The little horn had power over the saints for “a time, and times, and half a time” (v25). We should recognise that the phrase “a time, and times, and half a time” does not use numerical values (like one, or two, or three). Even the word “half” simply means ‘to split, or divide’ (BDB), and has no direct numerical connotation. So I will not be seeking a literal period of 3.5 to satisfy this prophecy. What I see in the New Testament is: the “time” of Christ’s ministry, followed by the “times” of the apostles, followed by a short period of time that Christ called “great tribulation” (Matt 24:21) leading up to AD 70. These were the times in which the Herods had power to persecute the saints. Consider the evidence:

• Time: Christ referred to his suffering at the hands of the authorities as “my time” (Matt 26:18). The persecution of Christ is therefore aptly described as “a time.”

• Times: In the same breath that Christ said “my time is not yet come,” he also said “your time is alway ready” (Jn 7:6). In Paul’s letter to Titus, he stated that God had “in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me” (Tit 1:3, see also 1 Tim 2:6-7 where “times” is plural). Thus, according to Paul, the preaching of the gospel would take place in “due times,” by apostles. The period of apostles is therefore aptly described as “times.”

• A Dividing of Time: Christ said the time of the “great tribulation” would be “shortened” for the sake of the believers (Matt 24:22). It is therefore aptly described as “the dividing of time,” or “half a time.”

We are told next that the judgement would sit, and the little horn’s dominion taken away. Note that this is given as the interpretation of v11 and 22. Since the little horn had become the face of the fourth beast, its destruction meant the fourth beast’s destruction. By AD 70, therefore, the Roman Empire had been soundly judged, the Herodian dynasty was gone, and the persecuting Jewish power which it represented was destroyed. More importantly, this marked the transition of all authority and dominion to “the son of man” and his “saints” (v13-14). The kingdom of God had officially begun. This is why Christ could say in AD 30:

So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away till all be fulfilled. (Luke 21:31-32)

And yet, after all the judgement, the rest of the beasts had their life prolonged “for an appointed period of time” (v12, NASB). This explains why the empires of men did not immediately disappear after the ascension and vindication of Christ. God allowed them to continue living under the kingship of Christ.

Conclusion

Considered deeply, Daniel 7 is the sort of chapter to give you grey hairs — respectable, colourless strands to which you should point with a sigh of contentment. You may disagree with the details of what I have said, but you should carefully consider v13-14 before claiming that the kingdom is not yet established.