Fourth Kingdom can ONLY be Greek

You would think that Daniel 2 would be a really easy topic to discuss.  Which four kingdoms did the author intend for us to realize as to Nebuchadnezzar’s statue?  

The author TELLS US who the four are!  Yet, so many still have to figure out this deep theological puzzle and get it to fit within their own theology...

The author only mentions four kingdoms all throughout Daniel… Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece.  Early on, it was that simple.  It should be that simple now, but has been over-complicated down through the centuries.  

If nothing else, it should be absolutely crystal clear as to who is the fourth kingdom since the climax of discussion is Antiochus IV Epiphanes and Greece.

Epiphanes ("god manifest").  The Jews mocked him and referred to him as Epimanes ("the madman").

Despite the known authorship and historical detail issues with Daniel, Yeshua instructed us to pay attention to the Book of Daniel.  Why?  Because Yeshua was telling us that the recorded events, in Daniel, were about to repeat on a larger scale with the coming Antichrist.  

The overarching theme of Daniel is dealing with the fourth kingdom (Greece [yavan]) and Antiochus IV Epiphanes of the Seleucid empire.  Daniel, or the author (or interpolator), does not mention Rome or the Islamic caliphate in any way, shape, or form.  Rome is not even on the author’s radar!  The Islamic Caliphate is a completely foreign idea for the author.  The fourth kingdom, by necessity of the overwhelming subject of Antiochus, must be Greece.  Antiochus is the climax of the prophecies as according to all of Daniel.

In other words, it doesn’t matter which kingdoms you believe the second and third to fall upon - Greece and Antiochus are in clear view as the fourth kingdom.  Especially in light of the fact that very little information is given concerning the second and third kingdoms.

The point is clearly this - the fourth kingdom rests solidly as Greece, within Daniel, and any argument against that fact cannot be solidly challenged by a definition of the second and/or the third kingdoms. 

Early on, the four kingdoms of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue were universally interpreted as [1] Babylon [2] Media [3] Persia [4] Greece.  There is clearly evidence that shows a strong history of support for the second to be the Medes, third to be Persia, and fourth to be Alexander and his successors.

The Peshitta, for one witness, repeatedly and unambiguously refers to “the kingdom of Greece” (ܡܰܠܟܽܘܬܳܐ ܕܝܰܘܳܢ) in Daniel 8:21, 10:20, and 11:2.  It is one of the earliest witnesses that explicitly interprets the fourth kingdom / the he-goat / the final Persian king’s opponent as Greece, and not some other power.

The Roman Empire never even came to be considered until the Greek Empire had fallen without the prophesied establishment of the Abiding Kingdom.  In other words, the prophecy had come to no literal fulfillment in relation to the fall of the fourth kingdom - the Greek Empire.  

In the view of the early church, this necessitated a reinterpretation by those who began with the assumption that it should have been literally fulfilled at that time.  The Roman Empire had succeeded the Greek, yet the Kingdom of God had not appeared and had not yet began to overthrow all earthly empires of the statue.

Jewish interpreters were eager to adopt a Roman scheme, but whereas they looked for the fifth monarchy with the advent of the Messiah, Christians became divided.  They couldn’t agree as to whether the prophecies were dealing with the first advent, or the second, for fulfillment.

Their claim is that Rome fits admirably for the dual legs of iron.  However, none can show clear evidence as to which the duality belongs.  There were so many different interpretations - eastern and western emperors (yet nobody agrees as to which emperors);  two consuls (secular and ecclesiastical); two different forms of government (republic versus emperor); etc..  The same issues relate to “the mingling of seed”.  There was, nor is now, no clear consensus among those who hold to the Roman view.

The book of Daniel, itself, answers the duality and the mingling of seed in Chapter 11 with the historical weddings of both the Ptolemaic and Seleucid marriages… Greece again.

Once the Roman Empire fell, new difficulties then arose and brought about even more chaos while trying to cling to the belief that Rome was indeed the fourth kingdom.  Matters became even more chaotic when trying to decipher the ten horns.

Another argument against Rome is that the Babylonians, Medes, Persians, and the Greeks, including the Seleucid, all existed within the theatre of the Middle East - as does all of prophecy.  Rome was never "Asiatic" in any sense.  As much as supporters try, Rome was never a legitimate successor to these empires.  Rome never swallowed up Babylon, nor any of Medo-Persia, which means that it could not be said that it’s collapse would cause the remainder to be smashed to pieces.

There are serious questions that cannot be answered concerning Daniel.  The authorship is seemingly not exclusively 6th century BC from Daniel’s time.  It was likely authored during the Maccabean period (2nd century BC).  Darius the Mede confusion also abounds and is confused with the other mentions of a completely difference Darius of the time.  Historically, we know that the Persians clearly overcame the Medes and then Babylon.  There are notably some problems with Daniel…

Having said that, Yeshua still directed us to pay attention to Daniel because the content was important.  Yeshua was telling us the same pattern that happened in 167 BCE (pagan ruler desecrates the Temple → faithful Jews suffer → God vindicates them) is about to repeat on a larger scale—and Daniel is still the key text for understanding it.

When determining the four kings/kingdoms of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7, Antiochus, the Seleucid Ruler (Greek), must be considered.

There’s no question as to who the head of gold belongs to - Nebuchadnezzar and his kingdom of Babylon.  There’s also no question as to the fourth - it’s clearly Greece.

Daniel gives us very little elaboration as to the second and third.

Yeshua directed us to Daniel.  Daniel tells us who the four kingdoms are.  It IS that simple.