History Prophesized -- Biblical proof of the Bible's validity, of God's reality. Prophecies that have come to pass! If these prophecies have come to pass, the rest will as well!
(Daniel 2:39-42 Discusses the statue in Nebuchadnezzar's dream that God gave Daniel the prophet interpretation of.
Synopsis: Head of Gold- Babylon, Arms of Silver- Medo-Persia, Belly and Thighs of Brass- Greece, Legs of Iron- Rome, Feet and Toes of Iron and Clay- Ten Kingdoms that followed Rome. In-Depth Biblical/historical study follows.)
Daniel 2 -
Verse 39. And after thee shall arise (1)_______ kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.
Nebuchadnezzar reigned forty-three years, and was succeeded by the following rulers: His son, Evil-merodach, two years, Neriglissar, his son-in-law, four years, Laborosoarchod, Neriglissar's son, nine months-- which, being less than one year, is not counted in the canon of Ptolemy, Nabonadius, whose son, Belshazzar, grandson of Nebuchadnezzar, was associated with him on the throne, and with whom that kingdom ended.
The Fall of Babylon. (We need to know this history because it is this very history that was predicted in advance by Daniel interpreting the Babylonian king's dream. Prophecy that came to pass. Prophecy that proven to be true would mean all of that prophecy would be true. If all the prophecy is true then we have a prophecy that leads right to our Savior's second coming! So please, take the time to read this history, no matter how boring it may seem to those who are not interested in such things. Read it once and know that the Bible is absolutely true, reliable, something we need to know!)
Neriglissar, two years after the death of Nebuchadnezzar, broke out a fatal war between the Babylonians and the Medes, which undermined the entire Babylonian kingdom. Cyaxares, king of the Medes, also called Darius, in Dan. 5: 13- called for help from his nephew, Cyrus, of the Persian line, wanting help against the Babylonians. Until the third year of Belshazzar, the eighteenth of Nabonandius, the Persians and Medes seemed to be winning, claiming success after success. Then as Cyrus warred against the city of Babylon itself, those inside claimed provisions for twenty years, and their impregnable walls seemed like they’d keep them safe. They even taunted Cyrus thinking they were safe from him. God, however had found them wanting as the balances were weighed and His will could not be thwarted.
While seeming secure and relying on that security they didn’t allow themselves to believe they were in any danger. Cyrus however was adamant and wasn’t giving up easily. Using very strategic thinking he plotted and planned to take the city during an annual festival.
Using the River Euphrates to get into the city was his only option. He had to use his great resources and divert the water from the city. Using three different groups of soldiers he had one group turn the river at a given hour into an artificial lake just a short ways above the city. The second group were station to enter the city were the river normally would have. The third went about 15 miles below where the river entered the city. The two groups stationed to enter the city were told to do so as soon as the diverted water allowed them access and it being night they were to sneak in to the palace of the king and capture or kill him.
The plan worked, but only because the Babylonians were so secure in the fact they were safe they gave into the festivities heartily as only those not fearful could. Had they been on guard things would have been different. Even the palace gates within the city were left open they were so unconcerned with the goings on of their enemies.
The great neglect cost them everything. As they slept that night secure in their kingdom, they woke up overthrown by their enemy, the king of Persia.
Belshazzar died fighting, and the feast of Belshazzar in the fifth chapter of Daniel reads as such. ‘In that (2)_____ was Belshazzar the king of the Chaldeans slain. And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old.’
God’s prediction had come to pass, Babylon the head of gold gave way to the Medes and Persians and that kingdom was never to equal the grandeur of Babylon, never.
God had predicted the city of Babylon would become a heap, the habitation of beasts of the desert. READ Isa. 13:19-22
{13:19} And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees’ excellency, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. {13:20} It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall the shepherds make their fold there. {13:21} But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there. {13:22} And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in [their] pleasant palaces: and her time [is] near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged.
To become so isolated and empty obviously the king of Persian couldn’t make it his seat of authority. In fact that went to Susa in the province of Elam, east to Babylon and set on the Rive Choaspes part of the Tigris.
Darius took down the gates of the city, and beat down the walls from two hundred cubits to fifty cubits. This was the beginning of its destruction. With the protective walls gone it was open to all sorts of ravaging bands. Xerxes returning from Greece stole the tremendous wealth in the temple of Belus and destroyed the edifice. Alexander the Great tried to rebuild it but died before that was accomplished. In 294 BC, Seleucus Nicatro built a new Babylon near the old, taking from the old city liberally to do so. The old city lay in complete and utter ruin. Near the end of the 4th century the Persian kings used what was left of the enclosure for wild beasts. At the close of the 12th century the few remaining leftovers of what was once Nebuchadnezzar’s grand palace were so filled with snakes and other venomous reptiles that people could no longer explore them.
And today where there is hardly anything left to mark where the most glorious of kingdoms even existed. God’s word was true. To those living in the time and splendor of Great Babylon, they would never envision such devastation, never and yet God predicted as much and it came to past just as He said it would. God’s word is true, His prophecies unfailing.
"And after thee shall arise another (3) ______ inferior to thee."
The use of the word kingdom here, shows that kingdoms, and not kings, are depicted by the different parts of this image mentioned, and so when it was spoken to Nebuchadnezzar, "Thou art this head of gold," although the personal pronoun was used, the kingdom, not the person of the king, was clearly meant.
Medo-Persian Kingdom - The kingdom that came after Babylon was Medo-Persia.
This kingdom is represented by the arms of silver on that great image shown to Nebuchadnezzer. The silver meaning obviously that it would be inferior to the gold that was Babylon.
Just how was the kingdom a lesser kingdom?
Obviously power wasn’t an issue because Cyrus put into subjection all the East from the Aegean Sea to the River Indus, and erected the most extensive empire that up to that time had ever existed. But it was inferior in wealth, luxury and magnificence. It didn’t have the pomp that Babylon had at all, it didn’t have the glory in riches that marked Babylon as a great city.
Strictly from a Biblical viewpoint the main event in the Babylonian rule was the captivity of the children of Israel. Under Medo-Persian rule Israel was restored to their own lands.
As a benevolent act on his part, Cyrus gave the conquered city over to Darius, his uncle. In 536 BC two years later, Darius died and so did the king of Persia- Cambyses, Cyrus’s father. With Cyrus sole ruler of the empire now it would be this year that ended Israel’s 70 years of captivity. The famous decree went forth for the Jews to return to their lands and rebuild their temple. (See Ezra 6:14) From the first of the great decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem the restoration was completed in the year 457 BC during the seventh year of the reign of Artaxerxes, it is also the beginning of the 2300 day of Daniel chapter 8, the most important prophetic era mentioned in the Bible (Daniel 9:25) You will see this all unfold as we continue our in-depth study.
After seven year, Cyrus left the kingeom to Cambyses, his son. Cambyses ruled for seven years and five months up to 522 BC. Eight rulers with varying lengths of reigns starting at 7 months to 46 years, each held the throne until 336 BC. They are as follows—
Smerdis the Magian, seven months, in the year B.C. 522, Darius Hystaspes, from B.C.521 to 486, Xerxes from B.C. 485 to 465, Artaxerxes Longimanus, from B.C. 464 to 424, Darius Nothus, from B.C. 423 to 405, Artaxerxes Mnemon, from B.C. 404 to 359, Ochus, from B.C. 358 to 338, Arses, from B.C. 337 to 336,
The year 335 BC is marked as the first year of Darius Codomanus, the last of the line of the old Persian kings.
This man, according to Prideaux, (The Old and New Testament connected in the history of the Jews -- By Humphrey Prideaux) ‘Was of noble stature, of goodly person, of the greatest personal valor, and of a mild and generous disposition. Had he lived at any other age, a long and splendid career would have undoubtedly have been his. But it was ill-fortune to have to contend with one who was an agent in the fulfilment of prophecy; and no qualifications, natural or acquired, could render him successful in the unequal contest. " Scarcely was he warm upon the throne," says the last-named historian, "ere he found his formidable enemy, Alexander, at the head of the Greek soldiers, preparing to dismount him from it. "
The reason for the contest between the Greeks and the Persians are better left to historians devoted to such matters. It is enough to say that the deciding point was reached on the field of Arbela, 331 BC, where the Grecians, though only one to twenty in number as compared with the Persians, were entirely victorious; and Alexander became absolute lord of the Persian empire.
Grecian Empire. –
"And another third kingdom of brass shall bear rule over all the earth," said Daniel.
It’s amazing how we so few words the prediction of the kingdoms following one after the other was made.
Grecia come after Medes and Persians, and is known as the third great universal empire of the earth.
When Alexander finally defeated the king of Persia (Darius) and the man was dead, the new ruler could begin to branch out to other lands, conquering them as he went. A Grecian fable about the sons of Jupiter, Bacchus and Hercules, comes to mind here as Alexander fancied himself a son of Jupiter as well. With absolute arrogance he gave the cities he overthrew to his soldiers, letting them do as they willed to those therein and a blood-thirsty lot they were. Alexander himself was also known to have killed his own friends in bouts of drunkenness. Gratifying his lusts was prominent. At the urging of others all of them drunk, he razed the city and palace of Persepolis, one of the most magnificent palaces in all the world. History states that after an excessive amount of drinking he was taken over by a violent fever and died 11 days later in either May or June of the year 323 BC, only 32 years old.
More notable distinctions in the history of the Grecian empire will be noted further in other prophecies, let’s continue on.
READ Daniel 2:40 - VERSE 40. ‘And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as (4)____; for as much as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things; and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.’
Iron Monarchy of Rome –So far, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Grecia are in order noted to be representative of the head of gold, the breast and arms of silver, and the thighs of brass, something acknowledge by all. However the fourth kingdom has brought in room for diverse views and differing of opinions. What is symbolized by the fourth element in the great image, the legs of iron? What kingdom rose after Grecia? Really there was only one so those who like to nitpick haven’t very much to go by. History itself is the recorder of what kingdom came up after Grecia, one kingdom and one only and that was Rome. Rome conquered Grecia and ruled everything.
The beginning of Christianity the Roman empire consisted of the whole south of Europe, France, England, most of the Netherlands, Switzerland, and south Germany, Hungary, Turkey, and Greece, as well as parts of Asia and Africa. Gibbon (Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Early Sources in Classics) says of it; ‘The empire of the Romans filled the world. And when that empire fell into the hands of a single person, the world became a safe and dreary prison for his enemies. To resist was fatal; and it was impossible to fly.’ Rome was clearly depicted by its iron rule, but even Roman was to fall.
READ Daniel 2:41,42 - VERSE 41. ‘And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be (5)________; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. 42. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly (6) ______.’
Rome in pieces- Before it was dividing into the ten kingdoms of toes made up of the weaker element of clay mingling with iron, Rome ruled with an iron will more so than any previous kingdom. History notes that the luxury and degenerate behavior of the nation as a whole and its individual rulers easily weakened it’s strong hold, which made the coming divisions of the kingdom possible, all predicted by God through Daniel His prophet many years before. Dividing the Roman empire into ten kingdoms. The question here is what kingdoms do the ten toes represent?
It’s rather easy if you take a natural, straightforward interpretation of God’s word, but harder if you wish to interpret it otherwise to suit other agendas those not of God. There are Romanists universally that will cling to errors along with some Protestants. In a book by H. Cowles, D. D there is an exposition on this- the errors are glaring really. He states that the third kingdom was Grecia during the lifetime of Alexander only, but we know it is kingdoms, not kings that God was talking about. He goes on to say, the fourth kingdom was Alexander's successors and that the last kingdom had to end a the manifestation of the Messiah. That God set up His kingdom then and the image was destroyed.
To touch on a few facts of the matter, given that one erring viewpoint we’d have to say that the Babylon empire was only Nebuchadnezzar, and that Persia was solely Cyrus, and Alexander, Grecia. It would put off the entire statue if we started picking it apart by king rather than kingdom rule. Even by this erring theory the first, second, and third kingdoms would have been long ago over and we would have been into many more than what the image represented if we were to go by the pick and choose supposition of Cowels.
Clearly Alexander's successors did not constitute another kingdom, but a continuation of the same, the Grecian kingdom of the image.
When Persia conquered Babylon, the second empire commenced and when Grecia conquered Persia, the third began. Alexander's successors, four leading generals, did not conquer his empire, and erect another, they simply divided among themselves the empire which Alexander had conquered, and left ready to their hand.
‘Chronologically,’ says Professor Cowel, ‘the fourth empire must immediately succeed Alexander, and lie entirely between him and the birth of Christ.’ Chronologically, we say, it is impossible.
The birth of Christ didn’t usher in a fifth kingdom as you’ll see when we continue our study. Cowel overlooks almost the entire duration of the third division of the image, confusing it with the fourth, and leaving no room for the divided state of the Grecian empire as symbolized by the four heads of the leopard of chapter 7, and the four horns of the goat of chapter 8. ‘Territorially,’ Professor Cowel goes on, ‘it [the fourth kingdom] should be sought in Western Asia, not in Europe; in general, on the same territory where, the first, second, and third kingdoms stood.’ Why not Europe? Each of the first three kingdoms possessed territory which was peculiarly its own. Why not the fourth? Analogy requires that it should.
And the third kingdom was a European kingdom? It rose on European territory, and took its name from the land of its birth? How did Grecia ever occupy the territory of the first and second kingdoms? Only by conquest. Rome did the same. Thus far as the territorial requirements of the professor's theory are concerned, Rome could be the fourth kingdom, as truthfully as Grecia could be the third. ‘Politically,’ he adds, ‘it should be the immediate successor of Alexander's empire’. . . changing the dynasty, but not the nations.’
Analogy is against him here.
Each of the first three kingdoms was distinguished by its own peculiar nationality. The Persian was not the same as the Babylonian, nor the Grecian the same as either of the two that preceded it. Analogy requires that the fourth kingdom should possess a nationality of its own, distinct from the other three. And this we find in the Roman kingdom, and in it alone. The grand fallacy which sustains this whole system of misinterpretation, is the too commonly taught theory that the kingdom of God was set up at the first advent of Christ. It can easily be seen how fatal to this theory is the admission that the fourth empire is Rome. For it was to be after the division of that fourth empire, that the God of heaven was to set up his kingdom. But the division of the Roman empire into ten parts was not accomplished previously to A.D. 476; consequently the kingdom of God could not have been set up at the first advent of Christ, nearly five hundred years before that date.
Rome must not, therefore, from their standpoint, though it answers admirably to the prophecy in every particular, be allowed to be the kingdom in question. The position that the kingdom of God was set up in the days when Christ was upon earth, must, these interpreters seem to think, be maintained at all cost.
Such is the ground on which some appear, at least to be standing upon. It is for the purpose of maintaining this theory we have to prove the fourth empire came into being as the others did, one after the other in a logical order that holds fast to all the previous points. We can’t bend prophecy to fit out theories. We have to look at history in its entirety and work from there.
Christ did not smite any image when He lived and died. He did not conquer as in times past we’ve seen the kingdoms conquered. The prophecy states the image becomes chaff and is blown away and the stone becomes a mountain fill the whole new earth. This did not happen. Christ’s life and death were not wrought in violence and overthrowing, there is no possible way if we’re to look through history and place things in perspective to the great image of Daniel, that we can say a Christ was a conquering kingdom. There was no smiting, no breaking anything into pieces. To lull yourself into that belief would defy all the previous predictions, those already accepted as having happened. God is not contradictory. When all the previous kingdoms were conquered none were smitten and broken to pieces, none were obliterated and no place found for it. We have to understand that the violent overthrowing with wars and strife are predicted and not to be ignored. That they weren’t said to be each totally obliterated, dashed to pieces by a stone cut out of a mountain without hands, says a lot. There is going to be more violence such as none of the other kingdoms were conquered with when that last kingdom is set up, not a quiet take over without nary a sound. It is really absurd to take on the theory of Cowel and others like him and believe that we are already living in the time of the last kingdom that conquered so magnificently it did so in a way no other had to date.
Do those toes, those made of iron and clay represent the ten divided kingdoms of the Roman empire? Yes. Facts speak for themselves. Simply- The great image of chapter 2 is parallel with the vision we find later in chapter seven of the four beasts. The fourth beast in chapter seven represents the very same image of the iron legs. The image of chapter 2 is exactly parallel with the vision of the four beasts of chapter 7. The fourth beast of chapter 7 represents the same as the iron legs of the image.
There are ten horns on that beast and they match up very naturally to the ten toes of the great image and in that vision the horns are noted to be ten kings to arise. Obviously they’d be ten individual kingdoms such as the other kingdoms were entities unto themselves. We know from Daniel’s interpretation that he uses the words king and kingdom interchangeably. In vs. 44 he says that, ‘in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom.’
This shows that at the time the kingdom of God is set up, there will be a plurality of kings existing together. It cannot refer to the four preceding kingdoms; for it would be absurd to use such language in reference to a line of successive kings, since it would be in the days of the last king only, not in the days of any of the preceding, that the kingdom of God would be set up.
This will conclude this week's study (Daniel 2:39-42) and next week we shall begin with the Ten Kingdoms and what kingdoms they are in fact symbolically representing.
Thank you for joining me in this study, it is my prayer that God grant us all understanding and help us to learn more and more of that which he’d have us know. May Jesus’s grace rest upon all of us and it is in His name I ask this. Amen.
Because the study of Daniel chapter 2 is very lengthy it will be broken up into several pages.
This concludes Daniel 2B The study of Daniel 2:39-42
(1) another Daniel 2:39
(2) night Daniel 5:30
(3) kingdom Daniel 2:39
(4) iron Daniel 2:40
(5) divided Daniel 2:41
(6) broken Daniel 2:42