The Danielic Imperative (26)

ThornCrown Network iconThornCrown Network

0 views

In this episode we take a listener's question and provide an answer from the Scriptures.

0 comments

00:02
I do a podcast. I'm not interested in your podcast. The anathema of God was for those who denied justification by faith alone.
00:13
When that is at stake, we need to be on the battlefield exposing the air and combating the air.
00:24
We are unabashedly, unashamedly Clarkian. And so, the next few statements that I'm going to make,
00:30
I'm probably going to step on all of the Vantillian toes at the same time. And this is what we do at Simple Riff around the radio, you know.
00:37
We are polemical and polarizing Jesus style. I would first say that to characterize what we do as bashing is itself bashing.
00:57
It's not hate. It's history. It's not bashing. It's the Bible. Jesus said,
01:07
Woe to you when men speak well of you. For their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way.
01:13
As opposed to, Blessed are you when you have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness. It is on.
01:23
We're taking the gloves off. It's time to battle. This is
01:30
Timothy F. Kaufman, your host of the Danielic Imperative, a podcast in which we understand the eschatology of the people of God in the light of the timeline he revealed to us through his prophet
01:41
Daniel. Jesus and his apostles expounded upon the future in explicitly and implicitly
01:47
Danielic terms. And unless Christians are familiar with the Danielic timeline, the revelations of Jesus and his apostles will remain clouded in mystery.
01:56
It is therefore imperative that Christians be familiar with the Danielic timeline, which is the focus of this podcast and the series of episodes we have produced thus far.
02:07
This is episode 26. Today we will focus on a listener's questions about the 13 horns of Daniel 7.
02:15
And yes, I'm using that number deliberately, since Daniel does in fact refer to 13 horns in that chapter.
02:20
When you read the whole chapter in the light of Jesus' revelation to John, you can see that Daniel knew of and in fact had seen 13 horns, since the fourth beast had 10 horns plus another three that had already been removed.
02:34
A listener asked that I spend a little more time justifying that assertion since it is unique in the history of Danielic interpretation.
02:42
So that's what we'll focus on today, a listener's question about the 13 horns of Daniel 7.
02:47
Let's start by reading Daniel 7 verses 1 to 8, and then we'll turn to the listener's question.
03:18
The first was like a lion and had eagle's wings. I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made to stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
03:30
And behold, another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised itself up on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it.
03:40
And they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh. After this
03:45
I beheld, and lo, another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl.
03:52
The beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it. After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly, and it had great iron teeth.
04:06
It devoured and break in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it. And it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns.
04:15
I considered the horns, and behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots.
04:24
And behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things.
04:34
As our listeners know, I claim that there were initially thirteen horns on the fourth beast, and that Daniel is only describing the fourth beast after three horns had already been removed.
04:44
A listener objected to that assessment, so let's get to the listener's question. It came from Stephan in response to episode one, and the question is as follows.
04:55
Hi there. Our church is preaching through Daniel at the moment, and I was given your podcast as reference material.
05:01
I'm a little confused by Tim's assertions. The ten horns are not the full complement, and the three kings didn't come from the ten.
05:09
Because as I read it, I'm not 100 % clear that this is warranted by the passage. Since it seems to be foundational for Tim's articles on his blog, this episode, and also subsequent episodes,
05:22
I was wondering whether you could ask if Tim could do a separate episode and address what average intellects like myself see when they read the passage.
05:29
As well, I guess, as most of church history, if that is the most common interpretation, and why that is not the correct interpretation.
05:38
I've read both of his blog posts referred to in the episode website, and both in those articles and in the podcast, he doesn't really go very deep into the logic or hermeneutical approach.
05:50
Since it's foundational, and since I'm confused, and if Tim has stumbled onto something that is revolutionary, it would be good to have it addressed with rigor and clarity.
05:58
I realize this was a few years ago, but it would be really helpful to me and probably to many, many others if Tim's interpretation is correct.
06:08
Can I suggest Tim could review popular commentators and show the logical mistakes they are making in limiting the horns to ten, and in having the three come out of the ten?
06:19
Thanks in Christ, Stefan. Okay, fair enough.
06:25
By Stefan's reading, the fourth beast must have had ten horns to start with, and my assertion that it started with thirteen not only runs contrary to what appears to be the plain reading of the text, but also happens to go against almost every commentary ever written about Daniel 7 in the history of the entire world.
06:42
So, yes, it's a fair question, and it will take some time to answer. We covered some of this in our first episode, the introductory inaugural episode for the entire
06:51
Danielic Imperative series, but we'll do a refresher course here, and we'll even expand on it considerably.
06:58
Daniel says of the fourth beast, it had ten horns. That's Daniel 7, 7. That is exactly what the text says.
07:06
It is properly translated, and what Daniel says is true. The fourth beast had ten horns.
07:12
I totally agree with that. Then Daniel says he was watching, and there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots.
07:21
That's Daniel 7, 8. Can we not simply assume that there were ten horns on the fourth beast to start with?
07:29
That is, the first horns were numerically ten, and that the little horn took three of those ten.
07:37
No, we absolutely cannot assume that, for the same reason we cannot say of the third beast, the leopard, that it started with four heads.
07:44
The text simply does not say that. And we know very well from Daniel 8 and Daniel 11 that the third beast actually must have started with one head, which was later replaced by four more.
07:55
We have to take the whole counsel of Scripture into account. Reading that the fourth beast had ten horns without harmonizing it with the rest of Scripture is precisely why the bulk of patristic literature and all the following commentaries appear to miss the rise of Antichrist when it happened in the end of the fourth century.
08:14
Because of their invalid assumption, namely, that the first horns were ten in number and that the little horn took three of those ten, the early writers and following commentaries were looking for a ten -way division of the
08:26
Roman Empire as the herald of Antichrist, when instead, had they understood what
08:31
Daniel was saying, they would have been looking for a thirteen -way division and noticed the rise of Antichrist when it happened.
08:38
It is a bold statement, I agree, but the text will bear that out. There are four main points we need to address to get to that conclusion.
08:45
First, Daniel never wrote that the little horn plucked up three of the ten horns, even though the commentaries often assume that he did.
08:53
That's an important fact that has to be addressed, and we'll see why that matters today. Second, in Daniel chapter 7, he only describes the final configuration of each empire in succession, providing only hints of what happened leading up to that final configuration.
09:08
That actually has a huge impact on how we interpret the passage. Third, when these first two points are taken into account, we can show from the scriptures that the little horn had removed three horns before he came into Daniel's view, and then came up among the remaining ten horns, and then took over as the successor to the
09:28
Roman Empire. An examination of Daniel 2 and 7, and Revelation 13, 17, and 19, will confirm this to be true.
09:37
Fourth, and finally, and this is really important, the Aramaic language in which
09:42
Daniel chapters 2 through 7 were written does not have a past perfect tense, which is why the translators have missed this critical point.
09:51
In Aramaic, past perfect is determined solely by context, and if the context is overlooked or ignored, as the commentaries and translators have done, we miss the plain past perfect tense of Daniel's description of the removal of the three horns.
10:05
Instead of before whom three were removed, in the past progressive tense, we should have read it as before whom three had been removed, in the past perfect tense.
10:16
We'll explain that more when we get to the fourth point today. Once we examine these in the light of scripture, we'll not only find the original 13 horns by logical deduction from scripture, but we'll also see from the historical record which ones were uprooted, and find indeed that the little horn uprooted them from the
10:34
Roman Empire while the Roman Empire was still in existence, but before the little horn took over as its successor, confirming what we would have suspected from Daniel 7 to begin with, namely, that after the little horn had removed three, but just before he took over, the final configuration of the divided
10:52
Roman Empire was a ten -way division, and then, because the little horn had taken the place of three, he was more stout than the others as Daniel notices in 7 .20.
11:01
So, let's get to work. Point one. Daniel did not write that the little horn uprooted three of the ten.
11:11
Typical commentaries assume that the little horn plucked up three of the ten horns, but, and this may come as a surprise,
11:18
Daniel never actually says that. By way of example, here are some typical commentaries from history.
11:24
Hippolytus, writing in the third century, interpreted Daniel 7 to mean that Antichrist subdued three of the ten horns.
11:30
In his treatise on Christ and Antichrist, chapter 52, he wrote, Jerome, writing in the following century, followed
11:48
Hippolytus on this and had the little horn subduing three of the ten. In his commentary on Daniel, he wrote,
12:01
There shall be ten kings who will partition the Roman world amongst themselves. Then an insignificant eleventh king will arise who will overcome three of the ten kings.
12:12
John Calvin agreed with him, at least on this, concluding that whatever was thus added to the little horn was taken from the ten horns, as from Calvin's commentary on Daniel, the thirty -fourth lecture.
12:25
These three, Hippolytus, Jerome, and Calvin, are just a few of many such examples. There are many more, and by and large everyone agrees, but Daniel never actually says what they think he said.
12:35
Here's what Daniel actually said, starting with the last few words of Daniel 7 -7 and continuing with Daniel 7 -8.
13:02
Now, as the vision goes on, Daniel says he was curious about the fourth beast and he wanted to know the truth of the ten horns that were in his head and of the other which came up and before whom three fell.
13:14
That's Daniel 7 -20. The angel responds and says, The ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise, and another shall rise after them, and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.
13:28
Daniel 7 -24. That's all we've got in this chapter about the ten kings and about the three that are removed, but it is worth noticing that neither
13:38
Daniel nor the angel ever say explicitly what all the commentaries assume, namely that the initial fragmentation of the fourth empire, the first horns, is a ten -way division, and that the little horn removes three of those ten.
13:54
Daniel does not say the first horns were ten in number, nor does he say the little horn plucked up three of the ten, or even three of the first ten, and yet all the commentaries assume exactly that.
14:06
They comment on the text as if Daniel had said in Daniel 7 -7, And at first it had ten horns.
14:14
And they comment on Daniel 7 -8 as if he said, There came up among them another little horn, before whom were three of the first ten horns plucked up by the roots.
14:23
And they comment on Daniel 7 -20 as if he said, And of the first ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three of the first ten fell.
14:34
And they comment on Daniel 7 -24 as if the angel said, And the first ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise, and another shall arise after them.
14:44
And he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three of the ten kings. I emphasize this not to malign the commentaries or the commentators, or to ridicule the authors.
14:56
They were all trying to make sense of God's revelation to us. I only raise this to make the obvious point that the commentaries are all commenting on something neither
15:04
Daniel nor the angelic narrator ever actually said, namely that the first horns were ten in number, the text does not say it, and that the little horn uprooted three of the ten horns.
15:16
The text does not say that either. All Daniel says is that the fourth beast had ten horns, and that the little horn plucked up three of the first horns, which is not the same as saying that it started with ten and that the little horn plucked up three of the ten.
15:30
To illustrate the significance of the observation, suppose I were to ask how many heads did the third beast have at first?
15:38
If you answer four, you would have overlooked the point in time when the third beast would have had only one head, which is when
15:45
Alexander ruled and his kingdom had not yet been divided four ways. And for the same reason, we cannot simply assume that the ten horns are numerically equivalent to the first horns.
15:56
Just like we evaluate Daniel 8 -8 and Daniel 8 -22 and Daniel 11 -4 to determine that there must have been a single head on the leopard in Daniel 7 before there were four heads, we have to use the scriptures to determine whether it is appropriate to assume that the initial division of the fourth empire,
16:13
Daniel 7, was really a ten -way division. It turns out it could not possibly have been, and that becomes even more obvious in our second point.
16:22
Point 2. Daniel only describes the final configuration of each empire in succession.
16:28
He spends very little time and in some cases no time at all discussing the configurations leading up to that.
16:36
In this chapter, Daniel is just giving us the sum of the matter, or literally the head or the chief of the matter,
16:43
Daniel 7 -1. This is the only vision in which he states that at the outset. He is not giving us an unfolding vision of each empire from beginning to end, but rather his focus is only on what he sees just before each empire is about to transition to the next.
16:58
We do not see Nebuchadnezzar before his humiliation, and we do not see the Medo -Persian bear during the dominance of the
17:05
Medes, and we do not see the Greek Empire under Alexander. Daniel largely ignores the earlier stages of each empire and has instead revealed to us not the initial state of each empire, but rather its final configuration, just as it was on the cusp of transitioning to the next empire.
17:22
And, to our point, Daniel has not provided an illustration of the fourth beast as it was initially divided, but rather what it looked like at the end of its dominance, after three horns had already been removed, and the little horn was about to take over.
17:36
Let's look at each beast of Daniel 7 to see what I'm talking about. The vision of Daniel 7 takes place in the first year of Belshazzar, king of Babylon, according to Daniel 7 -1,
17:48
Belshazzar being the last king before the rise of the Medes and the Persians. The Babylonian beast was like a lion and had eagle's wings.
17:56
I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth and made to stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
18:04
A lot of time has passed since Nebuchadnezzar was first installed as king in 605 BC, and the vision does not even begin until we are at the end of Nebuchadnezzar's humiliation, when the wings are plucked.
18:16
The vision is after Nebuchadnezzar's senses are returned to him and is given in the first year of Babylon's last king.
18:23
That is not the beginning of the Babylonian empire, but the end. The Medo -Persian beast was like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it, and they said thus unto it,
18:37
Arise, and devour much flesh. There's a lot to discuss here about the three ribs, but our focus for now is that the bear itself is lifted up on one side.
18:48
This is obviously the Persian phase of the Medo -Persian empire. According to Daniel 8, there is a two -horned ram representing the
18:55
Medes and the Persians. That's Daniel 8 .20. And the two horns were high, but one was higher than the other, and the higher one came up last.
19:03
That's Daniel 8 .3. We know from Daniel that the Lord took the kingdom from Belshazzar and gave it to the
19:09
Medes and the Persians, according to Daniel 5 .28. But the Medes came up first, since it was
19:14
Darius the Mede who put Daniel in the lion's den. According to Daniel 6. And Cyrus the
19:20
Persian came up after him. That's Daniel 6 .28. So the Medes were the first, lower horn of the ram, and the
19:27
Persians were the second, higher horn, and they came up last. That's from Daniel 8. The bear of Daniel 7 is also the
19:34
Medo -Persian empire. The bear in the lower state would answer to the lower horn on the ram, which is the
19:39
Medes. And according to Daniel 7 .5, the bear was raised up on one side, which answers to the higher horn of the
19:46
Persians, indicating that we are seeing the latter, higher, Persian stage of the empire.
19:52
The bear in Daniel 7, therefore, does not represent the beginning of the Medo -Persian empire, but rather represents its end.
20:00
The third beast, the Greek beast of Daniel 7, was like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl.
20:06
The beast also had four heads. That's Daniel 7 .6. We understand that the kingdom following the
20:13
Medo -Persian empire is the Greek empire. And according to Daniel 8 .21, the notable horn between the eyes of the he -goat is the first king, which, as we noted, is
20:22
Alexander the Great. That horn is broken and replaced with four other horns, referring to the four kingdoms that replaced
20:28
Alexander after he died. Lysimachus to the north, Ptolemaeus to the south, Seleucus to the east, and Demetrius to the west, as we covered in a previous episode.
20:38
But the leopard of Daniel 7 does not mention or consider Alexander at all. He is already dead, and his kingdom has already been divided four ways, and the four successor dynasties, the
20:49
Diadochi, are already ruling. The leopard does not depict the beginning of the Greek empire, but the end.
20:55
And that gets us to the fourth beast. Not only has the fourth beast already risen and subdued the
21:01
Greek empire, but by the time Daniel describes it to us, it is so far along that it has already been divided into fragments, from which the fifth empire will soon rise.
21:11
This period answers to the period of defeat in Daniel 2, which, as we know, is the latter period of the fourth empire.
21:18
But not only is it the latter period of the fourth empire, it is the latter period of the latter period of the fourth empire, since the fourth empire is already fragmented and the apparent successor is already coming into view, as Daniel watches.
21:31
And what we will find upon further analysis is that by the time Daniel starts describing the fourth beast, the little horn must have already removed three horns, which is why only ten remained in view when
21:43
Daniel said it had ten horns, and watched the little horn rising. The scriptures will in fact confirm that this is true.
21:50
And that brings us to our third point. Point three. The little horn uprooted three of the thirteen, while Rome was still an empire, leaving only ten in place by the time
22:01
Daniel started to describe the fourth beast in its final configuration. It is important to notice here that when the little horn begins to rise, the fourth beast is still in power.
22:13
The little horn is just one political entity among the fragments of the fourth empire. The little horn is not yet a global power, but is simply growing from the native soil of Rome, as the other horns are.
22:24
It has not yet risen to its status as the fifth empire. We know this because the fourth beast's reign does not end until after the little horn has come on the scene.
22:33
As Daniel says in 7 .11, Here in Daniel 7 .11,
22:48
the beast is the fourth beast of Daniel 7, or the Roman Empire, and we notice that the little horn begins to speak arrogantly before his predecessor is destroyed.
22:57
There is therefore a period after the rise of the little horn, but before the death of the fourth beast, when the little horn is simply arrogant and presumptuous, but has not yet entered into his period of dominance.
23:09
He has not yet risen to his role as a world power. This is confirmed by what we read of the beast in Revelation 17, which is the same entity as the little horn of Daniel 7.
23:20
John shows us in Revelation that after it rises, but before it takes over as the next empire, the little horn becomes for a short while equal in power with the other fragments, which receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
23:34
That's Revelation 17 .12. This is the fragmented Roman Empire, and the little horn is just one political entity in the divided empire, but it has not yet taken over.
23:45
And then the other fragments, according to John, have one mind and give their power and strength unto the beast.
23:51
That's Revelation 17 .13. It is at that point in which the little horn of Daniel 7, the beast of Revelation 13, rises to a global power on the world stage as the successor to the
24:03
Roman Empire. Reading Daniel 7 in that light, the appearance of the little horn occurs during the final days of the
24:10
Roman Empire, but Daniel does not address the dominion of the little horn, his ruling over the other horns, his persecution of the saints, until after the fourth beast was slain and his body destroyed and given to the burning flame.
24:21
That's Daniel 7 .11. In fact, what we see, rather, is a little horn that is growing into his ultimate role as he transitions from little, in comparison to the other horns in Daniel 7 .8,
24:32
and then becomes equal in power to the other horns, Revelation 17 .12, and then becomes more stout than his fellows,
24:39
Daniel 7 .20, and then the other horns hand over their power and authority to him. That's Revelation 17 .13.
24:45
What we are seeing is the little horn increasing in size, strength, and influence until he finally comes into his dominion and exercises his satanic power and authority over the world.
24:56
Now, at some point, that little horn is responsible for removing three of the first horns. That's what
25:01
Daniel says. When did the little horn remove them? That's the central question, and it is absolutely critical.
25:08
Fortunately, we have all we need to know from the Scriptures to determine when those three horns were removed, because we have a description of every significant thing that happens to the little horn from the moment
25:17
Daniel notices him in Daniel 7, until he is finally destroyed by Jesus Christ and by the breath of his mouth.
25:24
And we have a record of how many horns were with him the whole time. An examination of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 and Revelation 13, 17, and 19 will show that the little horn must have removed those three horns very early in the vision, but before taking over as the fifth empire.
25:39
In fact, the Scriptures will show that those three horns were removed chronologically, prior to Daniel's observation that the fourth beast had ten horns.
25:48
This is true for one very simple reason. At no point from Daniel 7 all the way to the final destruction of the beast and his cohorts is the total number of horns reduced from ten to seven.
26:00
From the moment Daniel describes the fourth beast until the moment Jesus casts the beast of Revelation 13 into the lake of fire, there are always and only ten horns with him.
26:09
And if the little horn did not remove the three horns after Daniel 7 and 8, then he must have removed them before.
26:15
It is really that simple. Let's assume for the sake of argument that there were only ever a maximum of ten horns on that fourth beast.
26:23
And Daniel only saw ten horns. So the little horn removes three of the ten, leaving seven horns.
26:30
That's pretty simple and nobody can argue with the math. There ought to be only seven horns left.
26:36
Now, let's see if we can determine the exact moment in time that the number of horns is reduced from ten to seven.
26:44
We'll be looking at the whole time span of the little horn's existence from the moment Daniel sees him come into view in Daniel 7 -8 until he is finally destroyed by the lamb and cast into the lake of fire in Revelation 19 -20.
26:57
So, here's the timeline according to the Scriptures in eight phases. The first phase is when the little horn comes into view among the other horns.
27:05
That's Daniel 7 verses 7 -8. The second phase is when the little horn shares power with the other horns.
27:12
That's Revelation 17 -12. The third phase is the phase of total power, which is assigned to the little horn as the other horns give their power to him.
27:20
That's Revelation 17 verses 13 -17. And Satan gives his power, seat, and authority to him.
27:26
That's Revelation 13 -2. The fourth phase is when the little horn engages in war against the saints and rules over them.
27:33
That's Revelation 13 -7 and does so for 42 months according to Revelation 13 -5.
27:41
Or until a time times and dividing of time according to Daniel 7 -25.
27:47
And the other horns hate the harlot of Revelation 17 and burn her with fire. That's Revelation 17 -16.
27:53
The fifth phase is when the little horn gathers the other horns for war against the lamb. That's Revelation 16 verses 13 -14 and Revelation 19 -19.
28:03
The sixth phase is when the little horn and the other horns wage war against the lamb. That's Revelation 17 -14 and Revelation 19 -19.
28:11
The seventh phase is the destruction of the little horn as he's cast into the lake of fire. That's depicted for us in Revelation 19 -20 and Daniel 7 -26 when his dominion is taken away.
28:22
And then the final destruction of the other horns is the eighth phase. That's Revelation 19 -21. The other horns are slain by the
28:29
Lamb of God. Okay, so that's a summary of the whole lifespan of the little horn and the other horns with him in eight phases from the moment
28:37
Daniel first notices him in the vision until their final destruction. Now at some point he must remove three of those horns, right?
28:44
Well, let's find out when he does so and find out when he ends up with only seven horns in his entourage.
28:51
It can't be in the first phase when he first comes into view among the other ten horns in Daniel 7 -8 because in the next phase, the period of shared power,
28:59
John records for us that there are still ten horns. The ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings which receive power as kings one hour with the beast.
29:06
That's Revelation 17 -12. So obviously he can't remove three horns in the first phase.
29:13
And he can't remove three horns during the second phase because in the next phase, phase three, the period of total power,
29:20
John tells us that the ten horns have one mind and shall give their power and strength to the beast. That's Revelation 17 -13.
29:27
And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall agree and give their kingdom unto the beast and hate the harlot of Revelation 17.
29:36
And as we saw in Revelation 13 -2, during his period of total power, the ten horns on the beast still have ten crowns on them.
29:44
Now he certainly can't remove three horns during the period of total power because after he persecutes the saints for 42 months or for times and a half, and the ten horns with ten crowns hate the harlot, he still has to gather the kings for war in phase 5.
30:00
And Revelation 17 says plainly that in phase 6 the beast had gathered the ten horns who shall make war with the lamb and the lamb shall overcome them.
30:09
And then the little horn is cast into the lake of fire in phase 7 and then the other horns are slain by the lamb in phase 8.
30:16
And of course the little horn can't remove three of the ten horns after he has already been cast into the lake of fire and the Lord has already overcome the rest.
30:24
Now at what point in that timeline, in those eight phases of the little horn's life, did the little horn remove three of the horns?
30:31
All the commentaries agree that the little horn of Daniel utterly removed three horns. The commentaries say destroyed, slayed, removed, rooted out, swept away, and cut out.
30:40
Calvin says taken away. E .B. Eliot says eradicated, and Luther says knocked off. Those are just some examples, but there's no fuzz on it.
30:48
Those three horns are utterly removed from the picture. If the fourth beast started with ten horns, and the little horn utterly removed three of the ten, then at some point the little horn ought to share power with only seven horns in his entourage, after he arises in Daniel 7.
31:05
Or, only seven horns should give their authority to him in Revelation 17. Or he should reign for 42 months in Revelation 13 with only seven horns on his head and only seven crowns on those horns.
31:18
And only seven horns should hate the harlot of Revelation 17. Or only seven should gather with him when he assembles them for war against the lamb, and only seven horns should be overcome by the lamb after he casts the little horn into the lake of fire.
31:31
So when was the number of horns reduced from ten to seven? Well, that's a bit of a problem, isn't it?
31:38
It never happens. In Revelation, John says those ten horns share their power with the beast.
31:43
Those ten horns give their power to the beast. Those ten horns hate the harlot. And when the beast assembles them, he assembles ten horns, and those ten horns make war against the lamb.
31:52
And then the beast is destroyed, and the kings of the earth are slain. And then that's the end of the story. The total number of horns never gets reduced to seven.
32:00
Even until the very end, the final count is ten, not seven. Now, at the risk of being tedious, we arrive at the same conclusion when we look at the statue of Daniel 2.
32:10
To understand why this is the case, we'll need to look at the two judgments that occur in each chapter. Note that in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7, both chapters indicate a first judgment against the fourth empire.
32:23
Daniel 2 .34 says, Thou sawest till a stone was cut without hands, which smote the image upon the feet that were of iron and clay, and break them to pieces.
32:33
And then Daniel 7 .11 says, I beheld till the beast, that is, the fourth beast, was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.
32:41
In both cases, it is the fourth empire that undergoes a judgment. The feet in Daniel 2 are struck by the stone, and the fourth beast of Daniel 7 is slain, and his body destroyed in the burning fire.
32:54
Okay, so far, so good. That's the first judgment. It's against the fourth empire. Now, let's look at the second judgment in each chapter.
33:02
After the fourth beast of Daniel 7 is destroyed, Daniel goes on and says, As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away, yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.
33:13
That's Daniel 7 .12. In the light of Revelation 13, we know that the way the other beasts of Daniel 7 had an extension of life is in the form of the little horn.
33:23
We know this because the little horn is the beast of Revelation 13, and the beast of Revelation 13 is comprised of all the other beasts of Daniel 7.
33:31
It was likened to a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion. That's Revelation 13 .2.
33:38
That second judgment in Daniel 7 is against the Roman little horn, and that Roman little horn is also comprised of all the preceding beasts,
33:46
Greek, Medo -Persian, and Babylonian. Of that little horn, Daniel writes, The judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion to consume and destroy it to the end.
33:56
Daniel 7 .26. When understood in the light of the whole counsel of Scripture, that second judgment in Daniel 7 is against the little horn, which is comprised of all the preceding beasts together.
34:07
We can therefore conclude that the first judgment of Daniel 7 was against the Roman Empire alone, and the second judgment of Daniel 7 was against the little horn, which in some ways was all the previous empires together.
34:20
Now let's look at Daniel 2 in the same light. The first judgment was against the Roman Empire since the
34:26
Scripture says the stones struck the feet that were of iron and clay and break them to pieces. Daniel 2 .34.
34:32
Those feet signify the Roman Empire in decline. But Daniel 2 .35 then says,
34:39
Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold broken to pieces together. And we are informed in Daniel 2 .45
34:45
that this occurred by a second, different strike of the stone. Thou saw'st that the stone break in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold.
34:54
That's Daniel 2 .45. We can therefore conclude that the first strike of the stone of Daniel 2 was against the
35:00
Roman Empire alone, that is the iron and the clay, and the second strike was against all of them together, that is the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold together.
35:09
Just as the two judgments of Daniel 7. Now let's focus on that second strike. If we are to hold to a strict parallel between those two chapters, and I believe we must, and a consistency across all the
35:21
Scriptures from Daniel through Revelation, which we also must do, then the second strike judgment depicted in each chapter must be against ten figures, call them toes, horns, or kings, but numerically ten, along with an eleventh chief antagonist who is part
35:34
Roman, beast, but also part lion, bear, and leopard in Daniel 7, or is iron and clay, but also part gold, silver, and brass in Daniel 2.
35:44
In both chapters, that second strike utterly destroys the Antichrist. Daniel 2 says the statue is ground to dust and no place on earth was found for it, and Daniel 7 .26
35:53
says the dominion of the little horn is consumed and destroyed to the end. That final judgment is the judgment against the beast of Revelation 13, which beast happens to have all ten horns with him.
36:04
That second judgment is also against the beast of Revelation 17, which also happens to have ten horns with him, which is the final judgment against the beast of Revelation 19, which is slain by the word that proceeds from Jesus' mouth,
36:16
Revelation 19 .21, and is the same as the man of sin, the wicked one who is slain by the breath of his mouth, in 2
36:22
Thessalonians 2, and the same as the Antichrist who is cast into the lake of fire. It is his final judgment.
36:29
Now, in light of what we can know from the Scriptures, who can honestly deny that by the time Jesus executes that second judgment against the little horn of Daniel 7, or against the wicked one of 2
36:39
Thessalonians 2, or against the beast of Revelation 13, 17, and 19, it is against the beast and ten horns are kings with him.
36:47
Nobody would deny that, since the Scriptures plainly depict the beast as having ten horns with him when he makes war against the
36:52
Lamb. And when the Lamb destroys him in the end, he destroys the beast and the ten horns with him.
36:58
Now, let's apply that to the statue of Daniel 2. Daniel makes no mention of a number of toes, but if Daniel 2 is consistent with Daniel 7, and the second judgment of Daniel 7 is really against the little horn and ten horns with him, and the beast of Revelation 13 rises and reigns with ten horns, and then, according to Revelation 17 and 19, they make war against the
37:18
Lamb and his saints, and the beast has ten horns with him when he does so, and the Lord destroys the beast and the ten horns with him, then how many toes would the statue have at the second strike when the stone grinds it to powder, and it became like the chaff of the summer threshing floors, and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them?
37:36
Well, the answer has to be ten, because every representation of the Antichrist, or the beast, or the wicked one, or the man of sin's final destruction by Christ, is in the company of ten kings, whether it is
37:47
Daniel 2, Daniel 7, Revelation 17, 13, or 19, the Antichrist always has ten horns with him when he is finally destroyed by the stone, the
37:56
Lamb, the Word of God, the breath that comes from his mouth. The Scriptures are very consistent on that point, they are unwavering.
38:02
From the first moment Daniel describes the fourth beast of Daniel 7 until the final destruction of Antichrist and his entourage, the total number of horns in his entourage never changes, it is always numerically ten, and thus, just like in Daniel 7, since the
38:16
Antichrist must have removed three of the toes at some point, then there must have been thirteen toes at the outset when
38:23
Daniel describes the toes of the statue, but never gives us their number. We can determine their number from the rest of Scriptures.
38:29
He started with thirteen and ended with ten. The simple fact is that Daniel never gives us the number of toes in Daniel chapter 2, but if he is consistent with the rest of Scriptures, and he certainly is, then the final destruction of the statue is in the configuration in which there are ten toes, which means at some point three had been removed, which means that that statue must have started with thirteen.
38:55
Now, there are some ways we can get out of that conclusion. One option we have before us is to ignore the math and press forward with our interpretation on the assumption that the math does not matter, but that,
39:06
I think, would be foolish. The words of Revelation were given for our edification and instruction, a warning and a tool for avoiding the temptation that would come upon the whole world.
39:16
We ought pay very close attention to what is said, and we cannot advance in our knowledge of the truth by ignoring the knowledge that the
39:22
Lord has revealed to us. Another option available to us would be to assume that the number ten is just a figurative number representing an indefinite plurality, which is precisely the approach
39:33
Calvin takes. In his commentary on Daniel 7 -7, he says, with regard to the number ten, we know this to be a frequent and unusual form of speech in Scripture, where ten signifies many.
39:45
When plurality is denoted, the number ten is used. Thus, when the prophet states the fourth beast to have ten horns, he means there were many provinces.
39:54
We need not be too anxious about the number, as we have already explained it. And on Daniel 7 -20, he says, regarding ten horns, a finite number is put for an indefinite one.
40:05
And on Daniel 7 -24, and with reference to the number, we said the plural number was only denoted without any limitation to the number ten.
40:14
Notably, Calvin provides no scriptural examples of when ten is used simply to denote an indefinite plurality, as he says is the frequent and usual form of speech in Scripture.
40:24
So, a little bit of a stretch there on Calvin's part. So, that's our other option.
40:30
Assume that the ten doesn't really mean ten, it just means a lot. But let's just think about that for a moment.
40:36
When there was only one horn on the he -goat of Daniel 8, the he -goat was the Greek Empire, and that horn was its first king.
40:43
It was numerically one. When there were two horns on the ram, one was the Medes, and the second, higher horn, was the
40:50
Persians. They were numerically two. When three horns were removed, exactly three were definitely removed, and nobody assigned a symbolic value to it.
41:00
When four horns came up for the one that was broken on the head of the he -goat of Daniel 8, they came up toward the four winds of heaven, north, south, east, and west, and were numerically four.
41:10
So, when we get to the ten horns, why suddenly ought they be figurative? I certainly understand the temptation to assign a figurative value to the number ten, but there's no cause, no context, no scriptural warrant for it.
41:24
Ten appears to mean ten, just like one meant one, two meant two, three meant three, and four meant four.
41:29
And when Daniel says there were ten, it was at a point that the little horn had already removed three.
41:36
So, to conclude this point, not only can we know that there must have been thirteen toes, horns, or kings to begin with when the
41:43
Roman Empire was first fragmented, but we can also know that Daniel's description of the uprooting of the three horns in Daniel 7 could not have been in the past progressive tense, as in before whom three horns were removed, but must have been in the past perfect, as in before whom three horns had been removed.
42:02
The little horn had already removed three by the time Daniel describes him coming up, and did not remove three of the ten afterward, as so many commentaries assume.
42:11
And that leads us to our fourth and final point today. Daniel 7 was written in Aramaic, and Aramaic has no explicitly past perfect tense.
42:20
It can only be construed from context, and now we have the context. So, let's proceed with point four.
42:29
I will now turn to the book called Studies in the Aramaic Interpretation of Scripture, Volume 8,
42:34
The Verbal System of Aramaic in Daniel, an explanation in the context of grammaticalization.
42:40
The book is available for free download at a link in the show notes. What we find in Aramaic, the language of Daniel 2 .4
42:47
to 7 .28, is that there is no obvious way to say something had been done in the past.
42:53
There is no past perfect, or as the author calls it, pluperfect tense.
42:59
Here's what he wrote. Not all pluperfects in translation are pluperfects in Aramaic.
43:07
I nevertheless agree that the suffix conjugation in Daniel can have a pluperfect, that is, past interior resultative function, with the caveat, however, that this occurs only in certain contexts in restricted syntactic environments, that is, in subordinate clauses occurring in past -time contexts.
43:28
The fact that the pluperfect meaning is contextually determined does not deny its existence, but is further evidence that the suffix conjugation does have an anterior resultative function, that is, the anterior resultative becomes a past anterior resultative in a past -time context.
43:46
That's from pages 30 and 31 of the text, and the listeners can look that up when they download the book.
43:51
But keep that in mind. If the event being described is known to have occurred in the past, then the pluperfect, or past -perfect, is the reasonable translation.
44:02
Let me give you an example. In Daniel 3, the story of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, those three godly men refused to worship
44:10
Nebuchadnezzar's statue. Three different times it is described. In Daniel 3, too, people were invited to the dedication of the image which
44:19
Nebuchadnezzar, the king, had set up. In Daniel 3, 5, people are instructed to fall down and worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar, the king, hath set up.
44:31
And in Daniel 3, 18, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refuse, saying, O king, we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.
44:42
The author of the textbook says that even though the same expression is used each time, different contexts require different translations.
44:51
On page 31 of the book, he says, In the past -time subordinate context of Daniel 3, 2, the verb can be appropriately rendered as pluperfect, that is, past anterior resultative, as in had set up.
45:06
In the future -time context of 3, 5, and in the present -time context of 3, 18, it is either a present perfect or a simple past.
45:15
Again, that's page 31 of the textbook. Just note that when the past -time context is known, past perfect is appropriate.
45:25
In another circumstance, in Daniel 6, when Daniel prayed to the Lord knowing full well there was a decree against doing so, the text says,
45:33
When Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went into his house. But in context, the author suggests it ought rather be translated in the past perfect or pluperfect, which is to say, when
45:47
Daniel knew that the writing had been signed, he went into his house. That's from page 30.
45:53
There's a lot more reading you can do in that free book, but my point is that, lacking a past perfect tense in Aramaic, past perfect must be determined contextually, and it is perfectly appropriate when what is being described is known to have happened in the past.
46:07
And guess what? After our analysis of the ten horns, we can conclude contextually that the three horns must have been uprooted in the past from the perspective of Daniel's description and the vision.
46:19
There is no other time they could have been uprooted. Thus, Daniel 7, 8 should say,
46:24
I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom three of the first horns had been plucked up by the roots.
46:33
And Daniel 7, 20 ought to say, And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three had fallen.
46:40
And Daniel 7, 24, the angel's explanation of these events should be read as, The ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise, and another shall rise after them.
46:50
And he shall be diverse from the first, having subdued three kings. This is not merely a convenient translation that happens to be consistent with my personal eschatology, although it is certainly at least that.
47:03
It is much more. It is the past perfect rendering into English from an Aramaic original that only conveys a past perfect tense in the context of an event known to have occurred in the past.
47:14
And these passages must be translated into the past perfect for the simple reason that the removal of the three horns is known with certainty to have occurred in the past from Daniel's perspective.
47:24
Those three kings had already been removed by the little horn prior to Daniel's description of the little horn coming up among the remaining ten, which is why
47:31
Scripture is replete with implicit or explicit accounts of the other ten horns, toes, or kings remaining until the final destruction by the mouth of Jesus Christ Himself, as depicted in Daniel 2 .35,
47:42
Daniel 7 .26, 2 Thessalonians 2 .8, Revelation 17 .14, and Revelation 19 .20.
47:48
And if we can know with scriptural certainty that there are yet ten kings remaining by the time Jesus deals the final judgment to the beast, and we can know with scriptural certainty that there have been three more than that prior to their removal by the little horn, then how many must there have been at the initial division of the
48:04
Roman Empire? There must have been thirteen before Daniel describes the remaining ten. And at that point in time, the little horn must have already removed three of the original complement of horns.
48:14
And thus, those verses of Daniel 7 describing the uprooting of the three horns should be rendered in the natural context of past perfect rather than the way they are typically translated into English in the past progressive tense in every known
48:27
English translation. And that gets us back to Stepan's question. He asked, I'm a little confused by Tim's assertions.
48:34
The ten horns are not the full complement, and the three kings didn't come from the ten. Because as I read it,
48:40
I'm not 100 % clear that this is warranted by the passage. Since it seems to be foundational for Tim's articles on this blog, this episode, and also subsequent episodes,
48:50
I was wondering whether you could ask Tim if he could do a separate episode and address what average intellects like myself see when they read the passage.
48:59
Yes, it is foundational to the interpretation, and it is absolutely required by the text itself. There is simply no other way around it.
49:07
But even a simpleton could have concluded that. If the fourth beast had ten horns, and the little horn removed three of those ten, then when does the little horn remove them if there are still ten horns with them at the end?
49:18
It is not a difficult question to answer unless you insist, against the testimony of Daniel and John, that the little horn had removed three of the ten and only had seven left by the time he confronts the
49:28
Lamb. Any schoolboy could have pointed that out. And when I say any schoolboy could have pointed that out, and any simpleton could have guessed it, remember,
49:37
I spent decades assuming that three of the ten had been removed, and never being able to figure out why there were still ten left at the end.
49:45
But, if we understand the consistency and the coherency of Scripture, the conclusion is unavoidable.
49:51
Those three horns were removed before Daniel describes the ten that were left. But let's move on.
49:57
As to the governing paradigm of our whole series, to identify Antichrist, we Christians ought to have been looking for a thirteen -way division of the
50:04
Roman Empire. But because of the erroneous assumption that we brought with us to the text, and I include myself in that, we did not see what
50:13
Daniel was saying. From the very first day men ever set out to understand Daniel 7, we have assumed that we should look for a ten -way division of the fourth empire, and thus, our propensity to overlook his rise is chronically and critically hampered by our own illogical assumption.
50:29
It certainly isn't hampered by the text, for the text has made the matter very clear to us. We should have been looking for a thirteen -way division of the
50:37
Roman Empire the whole time. Had we been looking for such a division, we would have seen his rise.
50:42
It would have been plainly obvious to us. And it happened at the end of the fourth century. Let's revisit the history.
50:50
In 293 A .D., that is, at the end of the third century, Emperor Diocletian began to reorganize the
50:56
Roman Empire and divided it between four tetrarchs overseeing a total of twelve dioceses, each diocese being ruled by its own vicarious, a
51:05
Roman officer living in the metropolis, the capital city of the diocese. We get this from Roger Rees' book
51:11
Diocletian and the Tetrarchy from 2004. He writes, Under Diocletian, the empire was divided into twelve dioceses, each consisting of several provinces.
51:22
A new position was created to head each diocese, the vicarious. The Tetrarchy hardly survived one generation, as Rees observes on page 89, but the diocesan divisions endured.
51:33
By the end of the fourth century, some dioceses had been combined and others separated, resulting in a total of thirteen distinct geographic territories.
51:43
This is quoting from Edward Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Volume 2,
51:48
Appendix 11, Dioceses and Provinces. He writes, Three changes in his diocesan arrangement were made in the course of the fourth century, and by 400 we find thirteen dioceses.
52:00
Egypt, which was at first part of the Diocese of the East, was promoted to be a separate diocese toward the end of the fourth century.
52:08
The Diocese of Moserium was broken up into the Diocese of Dacia and the
52:13
Diocese of Macedonia. On the other hand, the Diocese of Galliarum and the
52:18
Diocese of Vienensis were combined into a single Diocese of Gaul. Again, that's
52:24
Edward Gibbon, the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. The end result was a thirteen -way division of the
52:29
Roman Empire in which there were thirteen dioceses with thirteen metropolitan cities, and this is very important, a tiny independent administrative region that encompassed the city of Rome and the surrounding suburbs.
52:40
But quite notably, Rome herself was not the chief metropolis of a diocese, and certainly not the chief metropolis of the
52:47
Diocese of Italy. That title belonged to Milan. Equally important, the church had adapted itself to the administrative boundaries of the empire, with metropolitan bishops in each diocese, the bishop of Rome occupying a little non -diocesan administrative region over which he served as the metropolitan bishop for the city of Rome and the suburbs.
53:06
Because the church adapted itself to the administrative boundaries of the empire, the bishop of Rome was prepared in advance to be that little horn that uprooted three dioceses and then came up among the remaining ten.
53:17
We can pinpoint that thirteen -way division to within ten years because we have evidence as late as 373
53:23
A .D. that the Roman province of Egypt was still located within the civil diocese of Oriens, or the
53:29
East, and had not yet been split off to create the thirteenth diocese. At that time, the
53:35
Augusti Valentinian and Valens ordered certain devotees of idleness who had been apprehended in Egypt to be taken into custody by the count of Oriens and returned to public service.
53:46
If the diocese of Egypt had existed by then, the truancy of Egyptian civil servants certainly would not have been the concern of the count of Oriens.
53:53
They would have been sent to the count of Alexandria instead. It is not until 383 A .D. that we have a
53:59
Roman communication making formal reference to the diocese of Egypt. But two years earlier, at the council of Constantinople in 381
54:07
A .D., Egypt is referred to as its own diocese in Canon 2, so we can place the creation of the diocese of Egypt at least as early as 381
54:16
A .D. That was the last change made to Diocletian's initial twelve -way division, leaving a final thirteen -way division with thirteen dioceses at the end of the fourth century.
54:26
In the diocese of Oriens, the metropolitan city was Antioch. In the newly formed diocese of Egypt, the metropolitan city was
54:33
Alexandria. And in the diocese of Italy, the original metropolitan city was Milan.
54:39
So how did Rome uproot three horns and subdue three kings? Well, at first, Rome was a little non -diocesan metropolitan city with limited jurisdiction.
54:49
Within the diocese of Italy, Rome did not have the primacy since Milan was the chief metropolis. What is more, in the year 380
54:56
A .D., Emperor Theodosius declared that the religion of the bishops of Rome and Alexandria was the religion of the empire.
55:03
So, in matters of faith, Rome did not have the primacy either. It was shared with Alexandria. Additionally, the first apostolic church founded by Peter was in Antioch rather than Rome.
55:14
So, chronologically, the bishop of Rome did not have the primacy either. In one way or another,
55:19
Milan and Italy, Alexandria and Egypt and Antioch and Oriens, overshadowed him.
55:25
However, over the course of just a few years, the bishop of Rome would subsume the others under himself. In a communication to the emperor in 378
55:33
A .D., the church at Rome requested within Italy, disputes ought to be handled at Rome and nowhere else.
55:41
This we find from a petition of the Council of Rome to the emperors Gratian and Valentinian. The council wrote,
55:48
We ask your clemency to order that any bishop who has been condemned either by the sentence of Bishop Damasus of Rome or by that of us bishops who are
55:58
Catholics and yet wishes to retain his church illegally or who, when summoned by a court of bishops, obstinately refuses to appear, is to be summoned and brought to the city of Rome either by the illustrious praetorian prefects of your
56:13
Italy or by its vicar in Milan. If the man is himself a metropolitan, he is to make his defense without delay nowhere other than at Rome or before such judges as the
56:25
Bishop of Rome shall appoint for him. That's from John Lieberschutz's Ambrose of Milan Political Letters and Speeches from 2001, the petition of the
56:35
Council of Rome to emperors Gratian and Valentinian. That wish by the council was apparently granted.
56:43
Three years later at the Council of Constantinople in 381, the assembled bishops had the temerity to claim that Constantinople was the new
56:50
Rome, equal in stature and second only to the old Rome. Rome, of course, would have none of it.
56:56
The next year at the Council of Rome in 382 A .D., the bishop objected to the language of Constantinople, saying that Constantinople had no such status.
57:06
He claimed rather that Peter had only established three bishoprics, or apostolic sees, forming a single patron authority in three places,
57:15
Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, which by then were the three metropolitan cities of the three dioceses of Italy, Egypt, and Orients, three of the thirteen dioceses of the fragmented
57:25
Roman Empire, and among them, Rome had the primacy. This is from the Council of Rome in 382
57:32
A .D. Therefore, first is the seat at the Roman church of the apostle Peter, having no spot or wrinkle or any other defect.
57:41
However, the second place was given in the name of the blessed Peter to mark his disciple and gospel writer at Alexandria, and who himself wrote down the word of truth directed by Peter in Egypt, and gloriously consummated in martyrdom.
57:55
Indeed, the third place is held at Antioch of the most blessed and honorable apostle Peter, who lived there before he came to Rome, and where first the name of the new race of Christians was heard.
58:06
Again, that's from the Council of Rome. We notice that the three patron sees are ordered in such a way as to gather three metropoli together under the auspices of patron authority, while elegantly ordering them such that Alexandria is second to Rome, and Antioch is third.
58:22
This theory was echoed by Pope Gregory in the 6th century as he elegantly described a sea of one in three places.
58:29
This is from Gregory the Great in his epistle to Eulogius, bishop of Alexandria. Wherefore, though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself, the sea of the prince of the apostles alone has grown strong in authority, in which three places is the sea of one.
58:48
For he himself exalted the sea of Rome, in which he deigned even to rest and end the present life.
58:54
He himself adorned the sea at Alexandria, to which he sent his disciple Mark as evangelist.
59:00
He himself established the sea in Antioch, in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years.
59:06
Since then, it is the sea of one, and one sea over which by divine authority three bishops now preside.
59:13
Again, that's from Gregory the Great in his epistle to Eulogius, bishop of Alexandria. Even today, in the
59:19
Roman Catholic Encyclopedia, under the entry on the Patriarchate, this theory of the three
59:24
Petrian seas is succinctly described as one single Petrian authority in three places. The Catholic Encyclopedia says, the oldest canon law admitted only three bishops as having what later ages called patriarchal rights, the bishops of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch.
59:42
The successor of St. Peter, as a matter of course, held the highest place and combined in his own person all dignities.
59:49
He was not only bishop, but metropolitan, primate, and patriarch. Metropolitan of the
59:54
Roman province, primate of Italy, and first of the patriarchs. As soon as a hierarchy was organized among bishops, the chief authority and dignity were retained by the bishop of Rome.
01:00:05
Again, that's from the Roman Catholic Encyclopedia in its entry on the Patriarchate. And thus, in the latter part of the 4th century, at the time the
01:00:14
Roman Empire was divided into 13 distinct dioceses, the tiny administrative region of Rome and its suburbs grew up to subdue the dioceses of Italy, Egypt, and Orients, claiming that the religion
01:00:25
Jesus founded upon Peter was properly and only administered from Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, Rome herself being the chief.
01:00:33
The final administrative division of the Roman Empire had Roman Catholicism occupying and effectively controlling three of the 13 dioceses.
01:00:41
The division of Rome thus looked like this. The Diocese of the East, the Diocese of Egypt, and the
01:00:47
Diocese of Italy controlled by Roman Catholicism through the metropolitan cities of Antioch, Alexandria, and Rome, along with another 10 dioceses.
01:00:55
The Diocese of Asia, Pontica, Thrace, Macedonia, Dacia, Pannonia, Africa, Gaul, Spain, and Britain.
01:01:03
Within a year of that declaration on the three Petrine seas in 382 A .D. by the Council of Rome, the
01:01:10
Roman Emperor abandoned the title Pontifex Maximus. Within a few years of that, the Roman Bishop had adopted the title for himself, and by 395
01:01:18
A .D. the civil administration of the Empire was effectively administered by the bishops and in many of the dioceses of the
01:01:25
Empire, but particularly in Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome, the bishops had armed militants doing their bidding as the
01:01:32
Roman Empire faded into the background and ultimately collapsed. We won't go into all the history here, but the civil administration of the
01:01:39
Empire was ultimately controlled by the monks and bishops of what was ostensibly the religion of Christianity established by Christ upon Peter, but in reality and truth, what had risen up as the successor to the
01:01:50
Roman Empire was a satanic monstrosity masquerading as Christianity. It was the
01:01:55
Beast of Revelation 13 that had supplanted three of the 13 dioceses of the Roman Empire to aggregate to itself three of them before the
01:02:03
Roman Empire collapsed, and then came up among the remaining ten horns that Daniel had described in Daniel 7, looking more stout than his fellows, as Daniel says, because he now occupied the space of three dioceses, functioning as one.
01:02:17
Okay, so that's our special episode answering Stephan's question, asking if I could do a separate episode and address what average intellects see when they read the passage in Daniel 7.
01:02:27
So, hopefully we have answered Stephan's question. I'll just say in conclusion that any average intellect can see that the fourth beast of Daniel 7 had ten horns, and that the little horn removed three, but the same average intellect can also see that the little horn did not remove three of those horns after Daniel describes the ten.
01:02:45
Therefore, he must have removed them before there were ten. Therefore, the first horns must have been 13 in number, and Daniel must have been describing the fourth beast after those three had been removed, since that was the final arrangement of the empire before the fifth empire took over.
01:02:59
It's simple math, and it is revealed to us in the Scriptures. The most common interpretation for most of Church history is why we missed the rise of Antichrist.
01:03:07
It's an ancient interpretation, but it is horribly logically flawed and should be abandoned. Now, last time we analyzed the fulfillment of the two witnesses of Revelation 11, and I'll just say that we missed that too, because the most common interpretations of Church history have logically flawed assumptions that have clouded our understanding.
01:03:26
As we have noted throughout this series, the prophecy of Daniel 9 has been universally understood throughout history as a
01:03:34
Messianic prophecy, when in fact, it is a Mosaic prophecy. Because of the erroneous interpretation throughout
01:03:41
Church history, we have missed the abomination foretold by Daniel, which was the statue of Jupiter erected in the temple by Antiochus IV in 167
01:03:50
BC. Because we missed that, we missed the sign Jesus said would be the harbinger of His return and the destruction of Jerusalem.
01:03:58
We therefore missed the fact that Jesus had been speaking literally, that everything He said would happen within one generation, actually would happen within one generation, including
01:04:08
His first return on the clouds to judge Jerusalem. And because of that, we missed the two witnesses of Revelation 11, their death, their resurrection, and ascension.
01:04:17
Additionally, the most common interpretation for most of Church history is that the stone of Daniel 2 only strikes the statue once, when in fact, that stone strikes twice, first against the fourth empire and second against Antichrist.
01:04:30
It is only after the second strike against Antichrist that the stone grows up and fills the whole earth. But because of a logically flawed interpretation in which the stone only strikes once, the
01:04:41
Roman Catholic Church has been understood even by the Reformers to be that stone that grows up and fills the whole earth, misleading millions of souls to entrust their eternity to the beast of Revelation 13.
01:04:52
Had we simply read the text and harmonized it within Daniel 2 and with Daniel 7, we could have seen that between the first and second strike of that stone is an earthly satanic kingdom ruled by Antichrist, the little horn of Daniel 7, the beast of Revelation 13, the wicked one, the man of sin of 2
01:05:09
Thessalonians 2. The simple truth is that we have missed a lot because of the invalid, illogical assumptions we have brought with us to the text, because those assumptions were largely consistent with the majority interpretation for most of Church history.
01:05:23
But there is simply no godly reason to hold those assumptions, simply for the fact that they are so ancient.
01:05:28
So why not go back to the most ancient eschatology of all, which is the text as written and revealed to us in the
01:05:35
Scriptures. Now, having said that, it is time for us to proceed with the seals and the trumpets of Revelation, and where we will start in our next episode is the first strike of the stone of Daniel 2.
01:05:47
As we have noted in previous episodes, and we'll restate now, the toes of the statue of Daniel 2 are not mentioned until after the first strike of the stone, indicating that the first strike of the stone is what caused those toes to form in the first place.
01:06:00
It is Jesus himself who fragmented the Roman Empire. The toes, as Daniel says, are because the fourth kingdom shall be partly strong and partly broken, and the feet became partly broken because the stone struck the feet and broke them into pieces.
01:06:14
In fact, it is Jesus opening the seals of Revelation that brings judgment upon the fourth empire of Daniel's visions.
01:06:20
And as Jesus opens the seals, the fourth empire begins to fragment under his righteous judgment, forming the toes from which
01:06:27
Antichrist would rise, creating a chaotic broken kingdom, specially crafted and organized, such that the whole world would fall for a strong delusion unto which they believed
01:06:37
Roman Catholicism was the kingdom of God on earth, the stone that grew up and filled the whole world, and that the bishop of Rome was the chief shepherd of the people of God.
01:06:47
But the people of God know better. And when we walk through the seals, trumpets, and vials, we'll find that seven seals, six trumpets, and five vials are already behind us, as Christ continues to forge the annals of history on the anvil of his sovereign will, from the throne room of his heavenly kingdom, as he prepares for the day when he will destroy the beast with the breath of his mouth at the brightness of his coming to establish his earthly kingdom.
01:07:12
And to that end, in our next episode, we will lay out the order and the timeline of all the kingdoms and judgments that are in view in Daniel 2 and 7,
01:07:21
Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21, and Revelation, because knowing the difference between them and when they are to come and in what order they come is the key to avoiding the strong delusion into which the vast majority of the world has fallen.
01:07:35
That important information is provided for us in the Danielic timeline. As we have explained in previous episodes, if you believe the stone only strikes the statue once, you may be deceived into thinking that the ancient and medieval
01:07:48
Roman Catholic religion established in Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch is the stone that strikes the statue and grows up and fills the whole world, because the
01:07:56
Roman Catholic religion appears to fulfill that prophecy. Many an earnest student of prophecy has believed that and fallen for the lie, but if you understand that the stone strikes twice, you will see that there is an entire earthly satanic kingdom of Antichrist that rules on earth between the two strikes of the stone, and Jesus' earthly kingdom, that stone of Daniel 2, does not grow up and fill the whole world until after the second strike, after the destruction of Antichrist and his earthly kingdom.
01:08:25
If you collapse them both into a single strike, a single judgment, the Roman Catholic religion formed out of the three dioceses of the fragmented
01:08:32
Roman Empire will be mistaken for the kingdom of heaven, which it most certainly is not, and yet many have concluded that it was and is.
01:08:41
And that's where we'll pick up next time as we establish the order of the kingdoms and judgments so that we may understand the breaking of the seals of Revelation.
01:08:49
For now, this is your host Timothy F. Kaufman, and this has been episode 26 of the
01:08:54
Daniella Comparative, in which we have hopefully answered Stephan's question to his satisfaction and to the satisfaction of our listeners.