Daniel: Chapter 7
Whoa - Daniel Drops Acid
Approaching Apocalyptic Literature
An apocalypse is a revealing of information, frequently regarding the end of the world. Within the Bible, there are several major sections of apocalyptic literature. First and foremost is the book of Revelation; in the Old Testament, the latter half of Daniel stands as the primary example. Both books are full of vivid, symbolic prophecies; both books are also frequently subjected to detailed explanations by readers, and both books continue to defy these explanations (the more specific the explanation, the more humiliating the final result).

Examples of specific interpretations of 'the end of the world' (from http://www.abhota.info/end1.htm):
634 BC Many Romans thought the world would end...
389 BC More Roman fear of the end of the world...
1st Century Many early Christians expected to see the end of the world in their lifetime.
ca. 70 The Essenes may have thought the war in 70 AD was the end.
2nd Century The Montanists believed that Christ would come again within their lifetimes and establish a new Jerusalem at Pepuza, in the land of Phrygia. Montanism was perhaps the first bona fide Christian doomsday cult. It was founded ca. 156 AD by the tongues-speaking prophet Montanus and two followers, Priscilla and Maximilla. Despite the failure of Jesus to return, the cult lasted for several centuries. Tertullian, who once said "I believe it just because it is unbelievable" (a true skeptic if ever there was one!), was perhaps the most renowned Montanist. (Gould p.43-44)
247 Rome celebrated its thousandth anniversary this year. At the same time, the Roman government dramatically increased its persecution of Christians, so much so that many Christians believed that the End had arrived. (Source: PBS Frontline special Apocalypse!)
365 Hilary of Poitiers predicted the world would end in 365. (Source: Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance)
380 The Donatists, a North African Christian sect headed by Tyconius, looked forward to the world ending in 380. (Source: American Atheists)
Late 4th Century St. Martin of Tours (ca. 316-397) wrote, "There is no doubt that the Antichrist has already been born. Firmly established already in his early years, he will, after reaching maturity, achieve supreme power." (Abanes p.119)
500
* Roman theologian Sextus Julius Africanus (ca. 160-240) claimed that the End would occur 6000 years after the Creation. He assumed that there were 5531 years between the Creation and the Resurrection, and thus expected the Second Coming to take place no later than 500 AD. (Kyle p.37, McIver #21)
* Hippolytus (died ca. 236), believing that Christ would return 6000 years after the Creation, anticipated the Parousia in 500 AD. (Abanes p.283)
* The theologian Irenaeus, influenced by Hippolytus's writings, also saw 500 as the year of the Second Coming. (Abanes p.283, McIver #15)
Apr 6, 793 Elipandus, bishop of Toledo, described a brief bout of end-time panic that happened on Easter Eve, 793. According to Elipandus, the Spanish monk Beatus of Liébana prophesied the end of the world that day in the presence a crowd of people. The people, thinking that the world would end that night, became frightened, panicked, and fasted through the night until dawn. Seeing that the world had not ended and feeling hungry, Hordonius, one of the fasters, quipped, "Let's eat and drink, so that if we die at least we'll be fed." (Abanes p. 168-169, Weber p.50)
800
* Sextus Julius Africanus revised the date of Doomsday to 800 AD. (Kyle p.37)
* Beatus of Liébana wrote in his Commentary on the Apocalypse, which he finished in 786, that there were only 14 years left until the end of the world. Thus, the world would end by 800 at the latest. (Abanes p.168)
806 Bishop Gregory of Tours calculated the End occurring between 799 and 806. (Weber p.48)
848 The prophetess Thiota declared that the world would end this year. (Abanes p.337)
Mar 25, 970 Lotharingian computists foresaw the End on Friday, March 25, 970, when the Annunciation and Good Friday fell on the same day. They believed that it was on this day that Adam was created, Isaac was sacrificed, the Red Sea was parted, Jesus was conceived, and Jesus was crucified. Therefore, it naturally followed that the End must occur on this day! (Source: Center for Millennial Studies)
992 Bernard of Thuringia calculated that the end would come in 992. (Randi p.236)
995 The Feast of the Annunciation and Good Friday also coincided in 992, prompting some mystics to conclude that the world would end within 3 years of that date. (Weber p.50-51)
 
recently...we've got :
Hal Lindsey, whose 1988 prediction failed, suggests the end in his recently published book, entitled Planet Earth - 2000 A.D. However, he leaves himself a face-saving outlet: "Could I be wrong? Of course. The Rapture may not occur between now and the year 2000." (Lindsey p.306)
he's still finding the end however; the convening of a jewish group who is calling themselves the 'sanhedrin' is evidence that 'we are very near the climactic events that end with the 2nd coming of christ"
 
Jerry Falwell foresaw God pouring out his judgement on the world on New Year's Day. According to Falwell, God "may be preparing to confound our language, to jam our communications, scatter our efforts, and judge us for our sin and rebellion against his lordship. We are hearing from many sources that January 1, 2000, will be a fateful day in the history of the world." Happy New Year! (Christianity Today, Jan. 11, 1999)
 
Timothy LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, authors of the bestselling Left Behind series of apocalyptic fiction, expected the Y2K bug to trigger global economic chaos, which the Antichrist would use to rise to power. As the big day approached, they, like other doomsayers, backpedalled. (Source: Washington Post)
 
and so many more...

Symbolic predictive prophecy is extremely confusing; ironically, it is frequently coupled with an explanation that narrows down potential interpretations just enough to limit competing meanings to the use of similar nouns. Nonetheless, it is Scripture, and is not less a part because of it's difficult nature. Care should be taken to not extend what is clearly said by the text, but nor should it be ignored or passed off as it is a part of God's communication to his people.
The Text:
The Visions (v1-14):
Four beasts are introduced (v1-8)
Origin (v1-3):
sea:
great sea probably mediterranean (see josh 1:4, 9:1, etc)
parallel to earth in v17
probably insignficant - just that they come from the mess of history/humanity.
wind:
not a focus, probably just rising from history in course of events.

Beast 1 (v4): A lion w/ wings (griffin?)
It's wings are torn off, it's made to stand on 2 feet like a man, and it'sgiven man's heart
Beast 2 (v5): A bear, raised on one of its sides (to pounce? because of imbalance?), with 3 ribs in its mouth.
It's told to 'get up and eat your fill of flesh'
Beast 3 (v6): A leapord with 4 wings and 4 heads.
It's 'given authority to rule'
Beast 4 (v7,8): A terrifying, frightening, and very powerful beast with large iron teeth which crushed and devoured it's victims
It starts with 10 horns, but 'another' horn grows up and uproots 3 of the first horns.
This final horn had the eyes and mouth of a man, and talks a lot of smack (Bevo?)
The Ancient of Days appears, judging the beasts (v9-12)
The 'Ancient of Days' takes his seat among thrones; he's dressed in white, he has white hair, and fire is pretty much everywhere.
He is surrounded by a large number of people, and judgement is being pronounced (presumably by him, presumably against the 4th beast).
The beast is slain and burned, the rest of the beasts have their authority removed but are allowed to live a for 'an appointed period of time'.
The Son of Man establishes his kingdom (v13,14)
One like a 'son of man' comes with the clouds of heaven and is given rule over all the earth, for eternity, by the ancient of days.

The Interpretation (v15-28):
Rough Interpretation (v15-18)
Each beast is a king (probably meaning 'kingdom', as the fourth beast has several kings).
But in the end, "the saints of the Most High will receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever".
The Fourth Beast (v19-28)
If you thought the fourth beast was confusing, don't worry - so did Daniel.
The rest of the chapter is about Beast IV.
The rest of the chapter is a more detailed interpretation of the fourth beast. A few more details about Beast IV:
It has claws of bronze (v19), it wages war with the saints and defeats them until the Ancient of Days comes (v21,22), and it shall devour the 'whole earth' (v23).
Each of the ten horns is a king, and the horn that arises later is a king as well (v24). This king will "speak against" God, and "wear down" (or "harass", NET Bible) the saints for 'a time, times, and half a time' (v25).
But...he will be judged and his dominion will be removed (v26), after which all authority will be given to the saints as part of an everlasting kingdom (v27).

Guesswork:
Other Potentially Related Scriptures:
The Beasts: Dan. 2, Rev 13
Dan 2
Rev 13

The Ancient of Days: Ezek. 1
Ezek 1

The Son of Man: Matt. 19:28, Mark 13:26
Matt 19:28
Mark 13:26

Key Questions:
Do these 4 beasts correlate to the kingdoms in Nebu's vision in chap 2 (the statue)?
both have 4 items symbolizing kingdoms.
both have progress: one from gold to iron, the other in ferocity.
the last beast is associated with iron both times.
perhaps 1 is babylon, 2 is persia, 3 is greece, and 4 is rome
if 1 is babylon, that fits well with nebu in chapter 4
if 2 is persia, the 'larger on one side' bit might be becuase persia was dominant.
if 3 is greece, the 4 wings might refer to the speed with which it spread, and the 4 heads to the 4 generals who ruled after alexander.

but that 4th beast is funny, isn't it?

Does the 4th beast correlate to 'the beast' in revelation?
slain, then given to the burning fire (hell?) as in revelation 19:20?
and the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone.

How long is a time, time, and half a time?
this is normally interpreted to be 3.5 times, but sometimes to be an indefinite period of time.
the second time is, according 3.5 years works nicely as half of seven, which is a common biblical number.
it also matches :
rev 11:2 "they will tread under foot the holy city for forty-two months",
rev 12:6, the woman flies to the wilderness for "one thousand two hundred and sixty days" (42 * 30)
which correlates to...
rev 12:14, the women flies to the desert where "she was nourished for a time, times, and half a time"
rev 13:5 "the beast from the sea is given "authority to act for forty-two months"
 
1,260 is 42 months (where each month has 30 days), and 42 months is 3.5 years (12 months per year).
of course the hebrew calendar used then seems to have had some 29 day months, but leap years were present as well, etc...close enough.

Who is the 'Son of man'?
note that the phrase 'son of man' is also used in address to daniel in 8:15;
Gabriel says to daniel "Son of man, understand that the vision..."
 
in this case, it seems different though:
to some jews, this was david receiving eternal reign;
some have argued that it is michael or an angel.
some have argued that it is the jewish nation personified
modern scholars assert that it's a jewish king, or judas maccabee.
to a christian, it seems easy to say that it's christ, as he is the one who rules for eternity.
there was rabinic exegesis that apparently understood it to be the messiah (1 Enoch referred to a person as the 'son of man' [46:1] and then as 'messiah' [48:10, 52:4], 4 ezra calls the 'son of man' 'he whom the most high has been keeping for many ages' [13:26])
john 12:34 uses the terms christ/messiah and 'son of man' as the same/related idea:
The crowd then answered Him, "We have heard out of the Law that the Christ is to remain forever; and how can You say, `The Son of Man must be lifted up'? Who is this Son of Man?"
further, jesus himself seems to interpret the verse this way, calling himself the son of man in mark 14:61-63
But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, "Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?" And Jesus said, "I am; and you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN." Tearing his clothes, the high priest *said, "What further need do we have of witnesses?

Common Theories:
The fourth beast is Greece, and the little horn is the Greek (Selucid kingdom) king Antiochus Epiphanes, 175-163 BC.
if so, the 10 horns are other kings, mostly coming before him.
but three of them are three whom he defeated.
this has the downside of having three be contemporary and the others not, something not indicated in the text, but not prohibited either.
 
antiochus did indeed rule over and torment the jews in israel, killing many and going so far as to desecrate the temple by setting up an alter to zeus and sacrificing a pig on it (apparently) in 167 BC [dec 6].
this led to a revolt (the macabeean revolt), which ended when the jews defeated the selucids and rededicated the temple sometime around 165/164 BC, which is roughly 3 years (not quite 3.5)
of course, the war dragged on far longer, but hey.

 
the big problem?
the coming of the son of man and the rule of the saints doesn't take place immediately afterwards.

The fourth beast is Rome, and the little horn is the Vespasian (Roman Caesar from 70-78) or some other Caesar.
Vespasian is the Caesar who reigned at the time of the sack of Jerusalem in AD 70).
This is the preterist view (preterists believe that the predictive prophecies of Daniel/Revelation have been almost completely fulfilled already).
The kingdom of God which rules is then the church, which has spiritual authority and dominion.
This is a 'Preterist' view.
 
the big problem?
the rule needs to be spiritual.
the coming of the son of man timing might be a bit odd.

The fourth beast is Rome, and the little horn is the Antichrist, yet to come.
This is the currently popular view of the evangelical church.
In this view, the 4th beast may have been partially Rome...but is also a kingdom yet to come.
And the little horn is the Antichrist.
there are of course a billion ideas about who this little horn is.
hitler, come back to life.
the pope
a european
the united nations head
big bird (i made that one up)

This is a 'Premillenial' view.
 
God's kingdom will then be a literal rule upon the earth yet to come at Christ's return.
 
the big problem?
why divide the 4th beast into 2 kingdoms?


The Important Ideas:
Why the heck is this stupid chapter in here if it doesn't make any sense?
If the vision in the chapter is confusing and impossible to understand completely...
and
if the explanation of the vision leaves most things confusing too...
then why study it? why is this here?
 
well...what has daniel been about?
1-6 showed the power of God over the nations that conquered Israel.
7-12 show the power of God over nations that will conquer Israel.
Trouble ahead, but God already knows about it.
1. The dominant nations/powers predicted are not Israel/God's people.
4 beasts are mentioned; none of them are Israel.
God's people aren't the ones who will be ruling (at least on this scale).

2. Therefore, trouble should be expected.
God's involvement in history does not bring about eternal ease for His people until the end.
Therefore, trouble does not mean:
that God has forgotten His people,
that His people are 'out of His will' or in sin.

The good guys win in the end; God will clearly reveal himself and establish His rule with the saints.
remember the basic plot arc of bond movies / comic books / action movies?
meet the good guy, see his values (he fights for justice)
good guy set against terrifying bad guy who has all sorts of power
good guy struggles against bad guy...
good guy wins in the end.
- a revelation of his might
- a revelation of himself
In the end, we get a happy ending.