The beast that Daniel saw in vision

[Israeli Bar Avaddhon]

 

"After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible and unusually strong. And it had teeth of iron, big ones. It devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped what was left with his feet. And it was something different from all the [other] beasts that were before it, and had ten horns "- Daniel 7: 7

 

"I beheld then because of the sound of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld till the beast was slain and his body was destroyed and it was given to the burning fire "- Daniel 7:11

 

 

This treatment has the objective to correctly identify not only the beast of Daniel's vision but also the period of prophecy in connection with his murder.

This will be a fundamental prophecy.

Err the reference period, as was the case within Christianity, inevitably leads to straining and inconsistencies.

What some say about this beast and how it should interest us personally?

Since the dreadful and terrible beast makes its appearance after the leopard-like beast (Daniel 7: 6), which we know to be the Macedonian o greco empire, it must be the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire, in fact, as we have seen in several previous articles, takes the place of Greece on the world stage.

Since we do not see other animals that was, it concludes Roma to be "killed" and this creates a domino effect on many subsequent interpretations.

The prophecy would end the fall of Rome (Roma whom?), The Son of man of whom we read in the following verses is vested with the authority in the first century (see footnotes) and the book of Revelation, written before 70 EV, actually speak of the destruction of Jerusalem in the first century and so on.

As a result of the fact that everything would be fulfilled by the fall of the Roman Empire, the beasts that you give a "life extension" for a time and a season, would the nations of today.

I have simplified: there would be many other things but this is enough to understand how such an interpretation can change much our view of things.

Leaving aside the various contradictions and unanswered questions that this interpretation creates, we must see if there is really a credible supporting them with scriptures.

As we have done so far, the only reliable modus operandi is the comparison of records and respect for the authority of God's Word.

Let us first of all that the prophet's attention is captured by this beast and in particular by its horns - Daniel 7: 8

This is a key aspect of the vision.

We have already discussed the meaning of the horns in a previous article but now we will see it from another point of view.

We take as an example the Macedonian Empire because there is more than ever useful to acquire the right key to the vision.

We know that this empire represented by the goat, when he was in command of Alessandro Magno, was depicted with a "notable horn" - Daniel 8: 5

After the death of Alessandro Magno, when the empire was divided among four of his generals, the same goat is described as having "four horns" - Daniel 8: 8

We can see immediately a strangeness .

The original empire is actually divided into four smaller empires and yet there is always only one goat.

Why?

Why do not you see four different beasts?

Let's keep in mind these questions to answer later.

Now let's speculate.

If the goat, described by Daniel had been shot down in the time that he had "the great horn", what period of time would refer the vision and what territory would understand?

The answer is simple.

If the goat was shot down at the time of the great horn, this would take place during the rule of Alessandro Magno (between 356 and 323 BCE) on the only his vast empire.

If the goat in Daniel, however, was shot down in the time when he had four horns, what period and what territory would embrace?

The answer becomes more interesting.

In this case, the empire is divided into four and see the goat fall would mean the defeat of all four generals and their occupied territories.

In the vision, however, he would fall one beast.

From these considerations we understand that the beast represents an empire, but the horns are the powers that share or compete for the domain or the territory of that empire - Compare Revelation 17:12; Daniel 11:39

These horns can be allied, as in the case Medo-Persian empire, but they can also fight against each other as seen for example in Daniel 7: 8

When an empire is divided, because it is seen as other horns on the beast itself and not as the beasts?

Evidently because they emphasize from original empire.

The horns present in the same beast tells us that all those powers have arisen from the same original empire.

Having all the same origin, we could say that are "unrelated" to each other.

The Medes and the Persians, in fact, had many differences but also many things in common.

With this in mind, we can begin to understand the meaning of the vision of the fourth and final beast seen by Daniel.

As we explained in another article, previous empires are seen "hornless" because they do not have power or are not dominant in the vision of the reference time .

Understanding the vision reference time is very important.

This allows us to establish that at the time that Daniel has the vision, the dreadful and terrible beast is already divided into various powers.

What does this mean?

The empire is rising after the Macedonian Roma and on this there is very little to discuss as confirmed by the dream of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar - Daniel 2:39, 40

So the first part of the hypothesis is correct: the beast that Daniel sees is Rome.

That said, however, we must focus on the horns as did Daniel himself.

If the beast has ten horns, in harmony with what we have seen so far, it follows that the original Empire (Roma) is already divided into an unknown number of powers.

This, by itself, drop the hypothesis that Rome has to be "killed" as well as the time in which it would fulfill the prophecy.

From these ten horns, at some point in history, check yet another horn that is what speaks great things (Daniel 7:11); what is the time in which the animal is killed .

In Rome there is only the origin.

In simple words the prophecy is saying that the latter horn, whatever the time of fulfillment, is one of the many powers born of ancient Rome.

This beast is the final, there are no other - Daniel 7:17

So, since we should not expect the appearance of other animals, it is clear that his killing is done in the end time.

This king is the same which is discussed below and "grandiose words" that pronounces we can find in Daniel 11: 36-38

From the point of view of God, since this king will become an object of worship for many people, it pronunciation "grand words", that is exaggerated and completely out of place for a human being or human military power - Compare Revelation 13: 3-6

Intending to correct the vision we need not climb over backwards in an attempt to demonstrate that there is talk of two kings and two different times because the similarities are obvious.

Obvious for those who read the scriptures without trying to defend, at all costs, his own idea.

This means that what you read in the following verses, which the Son of man who is given dominion, authority and kingdom, is fulfilled in the end time.

This also leads us to realize what it is actually killing the beast and the fact that being thrown "into the burning fire."

This expression can only bring our minds to the "lake of fire" reported at Revelation 19:20

The lake of fire is a place from which there is no return and therefore you would expect, if this had happened in Rome, that there was no longer any trace of this empire.

Instead Europe and much of Asia and Africa is full of Roman remains, aqueducts from the statues the ancient buildings.

This does not give precisely the idea that was thrown into the "burning fire", is not it?

Instead of the last dominant empire on earth, as described in Revelation, it says that the whole beast will be cast into the lake of fire.

Besides, this is an action that can only make the Almighty God and His Son Christ, not an invading empire.

Unless speculate that the fall of Rome intervened personally God, there is no way to "harmonize" this expression.

Rome, in fact, never really died and was never really replaced.

The social fabric is wore out, and this allowed many people simply "get" and divide it but was never really defeated in battle.

He fell under his vices and under its own weight.

The vision speaks of the beast that is not killed except in time when this remarkable horn appears.

As we saw in the previous article, this horn is the last king of the north on the world stage, namely Russia.

It goes without saying that this explanation, as we have already seen, a wonderful window opens in verse 12.

The explanation that would apply all this to the fall of Rome, can not explain why, between kingdoms currently present (those to which a prolongation of life in our days) still exists Rome and even all the nations would be allowed that were exclusively owned by Rome.

If Rome is burned in the blazing fire and the other allows himself a "life extension", should exist Iran (Persia), Iraq (Babylon) and Greece ... but should not exist Italy (the when Rome is still the capital), should not exist France nor Germany nor Spain and so on.

Instead it appears that this extension of life a little 'at all is granted.

If instead the beast is killed at Armageddon, it is clear that the other animals are given a life extension for "a time and a season" after the judgment of Armageddon.

This allowed us to sensibly understand how he can "check" this Gog of Magog full Millennial Kingdom.

We just carefully observe, then, that world events, without being distracted by explanations forced and unscriptural, as we await the fulfillment of the angel's following words recorded in Daniel 7:18: "But the saints of the Supreme receive the kingdom, and take possession of indefinitely kingdom, even indefinitely to times indefinite '- see also Revelation 20: 4

Footnotes

* This interpretation asserts that the Son of man receives the kingdom in the first century to the fact that Jerusalem was under Roman rule (cf. Matthew 28:18), but obviously does not explain why, according to the order written by Daniel, this does not happen the fall of Rome.

Reading Daniel 7: 11-14 we understand that the enthronement of the Son of Man takes place after the killing of this beast and, therefore, the enthronement could not take place in the first century since, at that time, Rome was well far from being "killed."

That if we do not play the usual chronological order is not in the book.

However, it should be argued that when considering the order of the beasts as chronological (ie the order of the appearance of empires is chronologically Correctly or ) can not be determined in an arbitrary way that the next part is not written chronologically.

What it is written in chronological order it is also evident from the words of Daniel that says, more than once, "I continued watching ..." - Daniel 7: 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13

The writing of Matthew 28:18 does not prove that he began to reign in the first century (if not on the Christian congregation) because there is a difference between taking power legally and take it effectively.

If Christ had taken power in effect in the first century, it would mean that the world would no longer be ruled by Satan since then.

But sixty years after these words of the Lord, the apostolo Giovanni said "the whole world lies in the power of the wicked" - 1 John 5:19

** You do not even understand the "what Rome" would be talking about the prophecy since this empire was split in two in 395 EV

The beast can not be considered "killed" at the time of his division.

The Eastern Empire fell in 476 EV while that of the West in 1453 with the fall of Constantinople.

The beast can not be considered to be "killed" in 476 since a portion of it continued to exist and therefore in theory of Christ the enthronement event would occur after 1453.

However even 1453 can be considered the date of the beast dsell'uccisione for the reasons spiegat the in this article.

*** On the same line of this false interpretation of "Babylon the Great" Roma would be that would be killed (it is not clear by whom) to his downfall.

To support this hypothesis is often referred to "the seven hills of Rome" and many flights of fancy to determine who would be the seven most important king of Rome - compares Revelation 17: 9

**** "Finally," but not really seen that the inconsistencies are many, you can not explain for what reason the writing says "there are four kings that will rise from the earth" (Daniel 7:17) meaning it clear that there would have been only the most four kings , not one more. The explanation would like the angel speaks to Daniel, the four powers, but that would not have all the powers that would arise on earth. The vision, in short, get to a certain point but not to the time of the end - Look instead Daniel 7:18