Nebuchadnezzar - The Great Statue

Nebuchadnezzar's dream in Daniel 2 is a major eschatological passage.

Most "theologians" and "scholars" refer to Nebuchadnezzar's dream as "The Four Kingdoms" dream, or something similar.  They mostly all argue that Rome is absolutely, without question, the fourth kingdom - the legs of iron.  From this fourth kingdom comes the future Antichrist. 

Why?  Because they claim the fourth kingdom of Daniel 2 is the same entity as the fourth beast, in Daniel 7, from which the little horn ascends.  

There are definitely similarities between Daniel 2 & 7 but nothing to dictate that they are explicitly the same.  As you'll see below, Rome has nothing to do with this statue anyway.  Nor does Rome have anything to do with the four beasts of Daniel 7.

If you haven't read these blogs, they will help shape where I'm coming from.

The Fourth Kingdom can ONLY be Greek - Click Here!
Median and Persian - Click Here!
Daniel 7 Beasts - Click Here!

I remember watching an eschatology debate between Joel Richardson and Thomas Ice.  Joel bypasses Rome, for the legs of iron, and skips to Rome's successor - the Islamic Caliphate.  Tommy, no matter what you show him, he will never accept anything other than Rome as the legs of iron.  I mean, he’s got it so bad, I’m pretty sure he’d argue with Daniel about it.  Tommy has got a lot invested into the Tim LaHaye series Left Behind and Nicolae Carphatia (as the "Roman" antichrist) so this really comes as no surprise.  

That’s the way "theology" goes sometimes… people can’t admit when they’re wrong no matter how much evidence you show them.  That’s usually at the top of my prayer requests… “Lord Yeshua, show me where I am wrong… I only want the Truth!”.  Most everyone who reads this will still not let go of Rome and have probably stopped reading by now... that's ok.  I'm not invested in anything other than Yeshua's Truth.

From very early on in Joel Richardson's books, I’ve bought into his reasoning.  I could never quite justify skipping over Rome though.  It was just always nagging at me - the text of Daniel 2 seemed to require four successive kingdoms.  Then, I got all wrapped up in the historical context of what we clearly know today about history.  This caused me to keep digging... and then, I had a "duh" moment.  

The author of Daniel tells us exactly who the four kingdoms are.

Now… I don’t have to accept Rome, nor the Islamic Caliphate as the fourth kingdom and I still believe we're to be watching for an Islamic Antichrist.

The fourth kingdom is Greece (yavan - more on this word later).  This brings the entire eschatological view into complete focus including Daniel 7.  Antiochus IV Epiphanes was the ultimate foreshadow of the coming Antichrist.  You can read more about it in the Maccabeen accounts.  He ruled under the Seleucid dynasty as one of the successor kingdoms of Alexander the Great.  His base was Antioch, in Syria (modern-day southern Turkey, near the Syrian border). We'll discuss Antiochus in a little more detail when we hit Daniel 8 & 11.

Greek philosophy has so heavily influenced Western civilization and Theology, to this very day, that it’s again - a perfect fit for the iron legs.

[Zec 9:9-13 LSB]  Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Make a loud shout, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you; He is righteous and endowed with salvation, Lowly and mounted on a donkey, Even on a colt, the foal of a pack animal. [10]  I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim And the horse from Jerusalem; And the bow of war will be cut off. And He will speak peace to the nations; And His reign will be from sea to sea And from the River to the ends of the earth. [11]  As for you also, because of the blood of your covenant, I have set your prisoners free from the waterless pit. [12]  Return to the stronghold, O prisoners who have the hope; This very day I am declaring that I will return double to you. [13]  For I will bend Judah as My bow; I will fill the bow with Ephraim. And I will rouse up your sons, O Zion, against your sons, O Greece [H3120 - yavan]; And I will make you like a mighty man’s sword.

Let’s start at the top…

Why do the "theologians" and "scholars" prefer Rome?

It began when Greece fell and the prophecy went un-fulfilled (more on that below).

Later, because of their preconceived notions from other passages throughout Scripture (i.e., "seven hills of Rome", AD 70 destruction of the temple, etc.), and their bloodlust for Roman Catholicism, these "scholars" have swayed western theology for centuries.  They are so desperate to tie the Antichrist to the Roman Catholic Church that they’re willing to sacrifice reason and Truth.  Why?  "Because we're Bible believing Protestants of course!  We're the TRUE Church - not those Catholic heretics!".

They almost all, universally, see the four kingdoms as:

[1]  Babylon - Head of Gold
[2]  Medo-Persia - Chest and Arms of Silver
[3]  Greece - Belly and Thighs of Bronze
[4]  Rome - Legs of Iron

This horrible interpretation for Rome as the fourth kingdom has a deep history.  In short, it stems from this verse.

[Dan 2:44 LSB]  And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will cause a kingdom to rise up which will never be destroyed, and that kingdom will not be left for another people; it will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, but it will itself stand forever.
Since the eschatological destruction of the Hellenistic [Greece] kingdoms did not occur, later Jewish and Christian writers identified the fourth kingdom with Rome, combining the Medes and the Persians as a single kingdom (cf. 4 Ezra [2 Esd] 13; Josephus, Ant. 10.206–10; Jerome, on 2:31–40). Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (p. 80). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition.

Since the destruction did not occur, which it won't until the Stone (Yeshua) smashes the feet at His return, they've decided Rome needs to be fit in since it was in power (succeeded Greece) at the time of their "bible-study" decision (above).

Notice, that they also decided to combine the Medes and Persians into one section of the statue as “Medo-Persia”.  As we'll see in Daniel 8, the Medes and Persians are two distinct entities that together form one entity.  More on this later. 

Also notice that, once again, Jerome has his fingers in another topic that would heavily persuade the western church for centuries.  Jerome is responsible for the Gog-Magog discussion moving away from the text of Revelation 20, and the absolute mess found in the "Lucifer" debacle.  I discuss both of these issues in other blogs.  Jerome became more, and more, influenced by Greek philosophy, as he continued, and it shows in his work.  Not only in his "work" but also his translations... which we're stuck with to this day!

With the decline of the Roman Empire in the fifth century, Roman Christians faced a new historiographical dilemma with regard to the four-kingdom schema. Augustine’s book City of God, for example, tried to distinguish between the merely worldly empire of Rome and the spiritual kingdom of God, which would never perish. In his discussion of Daniel, Augustine brushes past speculation on the schema, agreeing to its basic interpretation but downplaying its significance: 

Quote from Augustine who heavily spiritualized almost everything in accordance with Greek philosophy (specifically Platonism):

“There are some expositors who take the four kingdoms to be the Assyrian, Persian, Macedonian, and Roman Empires. This is an excellent suggestion, as anyone can see who will study the scholarly and carefully written work of the priest, Jerome, on Daniel” (Civ. 20.23).  Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (p. 87-88). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition. 

Western Christianity has been ensnared by this "theology" ever since.

Ok, so if Rome isn't the fourth kingdom, then who is?  As I mentioned above - Greece.

We need to look at this dream and interpretation through the eyes of textual context as found in Daniel.  What was the author trying to convey?  In all of Daniel, he only mentions four kingdoms - Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece.

While Daniel is in captivity, Babylon is in power at the time.  That's where his story begins.  He has been exiled into Babylonian captivity and the sequence of successive kings/kingdoms begins with Babylon for him as he is interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's dream.

The First Kingdom

The first kingdom is pretty straight forward:

[Dan 2:37-38 LSB]  “You, O king [Nebuchadnezzar], are the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given the kingdom, the power, the strength, and the glory; [38]  and wherever the sons of men inhabit, or the beasts of the field, or the birds of the sky, He has given them into your hand and has made you rule with power over them all. You are the head of gold.

Note that Daniel begins by pointing out that his authority was given to him by Yahweh.  All rulers have been expressly appointed by Yahweh.

[Rom 13:1 LSB]  Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist have been appointed by God.

[Jer 27:5-7 LSB]  “I have made the earth, the men, and the animals which are on the face of the earth by My great power and by My outstretched arm, and I will give it to the one who is right in My eyes. [6]  “So now, I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, My servant, and I have given him even the wild beasts of the field to serve him. [7]  “All the nations shall serve him and his son and his grandson until the time of his own land comes; then many nations and great kings will make him their servant.

Daniel tells us that the head of gold is Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.  

The Second Kingdom

What are the qualifiers for the second kingdom, the chest and arms of silver?

[Dan 2:39a LSB]  “But after you there will arise another kingdom inferior to you [literally: "earth (or dirt) in comparison to you"]... 

Again, contextually, who was the next "inferior" kingdom?

After Nebuchadnezzar's death, several kings carried on for Babylon until the final... Belshazzar.  On the very night of Belshazzar’s feast (the "writing on the wall" incident), Babylon fell.

[Dan 5:30 LSB]  That same night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was killed.

Historical records tell us that it was likely Gubaru (Ugbaru), the Mede, who diverted the Euphrates and entered Babylon through the dry riverbed.  

However, the author of Daniel tells us that Darius the Mede "received the kingdom" and "was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans".

[Dan 5:31 LSB]  So Darius the Mede received the kingdom at about the age of sixty-two.

[Dan 6:1 LSB]  It seemed good to Darius that he set 120 satraps over the kingdom, that they would be in charge of the whole kingdom,

[Dan 9:1 LSB]  In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, from the seed of the Medes, who was made king over the kingdom of the Chaldeans

So, in the narrative of Daniel, Darius the Mede (possibly a fictional character) took over immediately from Belshazzar, on the night Babylon fell in 539 BC. Darius did not reign long. This also helps to explain the phrase "inferior to you" in verse 39.

Having said all this, I would argue the chest of arms of silver belong to Darius the Mede.  He represented the successive, although inferior, kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar.  

Historically, outside of Scripture, the succeeding nations are almost universally listed as Assyria, Medes, Persia, and Greece.  

The earliest records to which we have access can be found in the writings of Herodotus (5th c. B.C.E.) and Ctesias (4th c. B.C.E.; preserved in Diodorus Siculus 2.1–34).

Both Herodotus and Ctesias describe the transfer of sovereignty as proceeding from the Assyrians to the Medes and then to the Persians.  However, they skip Babylon and assign Assyria prior to the Medes.

Why did they skip Babylon?

Herodotus is writing about the rise of Persia. For him the great inland power before the Medes was the Assyrian Empire. After Assyria fell (612–609 BC), the Medes were the dominant power for a generation, then Cyrus overthrew the Medes (550 BC) and created the Persian Empire. Babylon is simply the city the Medes and Persians fought over. It is not treated as a separate "world empire" in his narrative.

Classical Greek & Roman writers, in general, inherited the eastern Mediterranean perspective. For Greeks, the sequence of great hegemonic powers that threatened or ruled the East was: (1) Assyria (terrifying in memory), (2) Medes (who sacked Nineveh), (3) Persians (who actually ruled the Greek cities and invaded Greece), (4) Greece - Alexander the Great. The Neo-Babylonian Empire (626–539 BC) was very short (only ~87 years) and never directly fought mainland Greece, so it was often folded under "Assyrian" or treated as a subset.
The Romans however, did use the historiographical schema in sources attested from the second century B.C.E. onward (Polybius 38.22; Dionysius of Halicarnassus 1.2.2–4; Tacitus, Hist 5.8–9; Appian, Hist. rom., Preface, 9). Arguably the earliest account is that of Amelius Sura (so Swain 2–3; but see Mendels): 

The Assyrians were the first of all races to hold power, then the Medes, after them the Persians, and then the Macedonians. Then when the two kings, Philip and Antiochus, of Macedonian origin, had been completely conquered, soon after the overthrow of Carthage, the supreme command passed to the Roman people. (via Swain 2–3)  Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (p. 80). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition.

Later Jewish and Christian "four empire" tradition, that became standard was: Babylon → Media → Persia → Greece. This is the sequence most people knew (from Daniel + Josephus + Church Fathers). Here Babylon is not skipped. The earlier writers who used Assyria → Medes → Persia were simply using a different starting point.

This sequence of Assyria, Media, and Persia is also reflected in the book of Tobit (14:4), which was likely composed in the Eastern Diaspora, and in the Jewish Sibylline Oracles 4:49–101.  Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (p. 80). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition. 

The schema found in Dan 2, however, differs in structure and function from that used by the Romans. Like the Persians, the Romans were interested in legitimizing their empire as the successor to the series of world empires in a simple schema of continuity.  Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (p. 80). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition. 

In reality, Babylon and the Medes worked together for a short time.  Nabopolassar formed an alliance with the Medes (a powerful Iranian people under King Cyaxares). Together they sacked the Assyrian religious center at Assur, destroyed Ninevah, and deleted the last of the Assyrian forces at Harran. The Medes took the northern and eastern parts of the former Assyrian Empire (the mountains and the old Assyrian heartland around Assur and Nineveh).  The Neo-Babylonian Empire, under Nabopolassar and his son Nebuchadnezzar II took the western and southern territories, including all of Syria, the Levant, and of course Babylon itself.

As mentioned above, the famous general who actually entered the city (Gubaru/Ugbaru) was a Mede or from the Median region (Nabonidus Chronicle calls him “governor of Gutium,” a Median area).

I post the quotes above as showing that the Medes are shown as being succeeded by the Persians in early history.  They were not recognized as a combined, or the "Medo-Persian", empire until later.

There are also few biblical texts which refer to the Medes as potential successors to the Babylonians. The author of Daniel likely knew of these prophecies.

Yahweh's Judgment on Babylon:

[Isa 13:17-18 LSB]  Behold, I am going to awaken the Medes against them, Who will not think about silver or take pleasure in gold. [18]  And their bows will dash the young men to pieces, They will not even have compassion on the fruit of the womb, Nor will their eye pity children.

[Isa 21:2 LSB]  A harsh vision has been declared to me; The treacherous one still deals treacherously, and the destroyer still destroys. Go up, Elam, lay siege, Media; I have made an end of all the groaning she has caused.

Destruction of Babylon:

[Jer 51:11 LSB]  Sharpen the arrows, fill the quivers! Yahweh has aroused the spirit of the kings of the Medes Because His purpose is against Babylon to destroy it; For it is the vengeance of Yahweh, vengeance for His temple.

And...

[Jer 51:28 LSB]  Set apart the nations against her, The kings of the Medes, Their governors and all their prefects And every land of their rule.

By now it should be easy to see why Daniel claims Babylon (not Assyria) being succeeded by the Medes.

The literary setting of the chapter is important since it introduces the sequence of kingdoms that is presupposed both in the collection of tales and in the whole book. Though the four kingdoms are not named they can be identified only as Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece, and this sequence is made explicit by the subsequent references to “Darius the Mede” and Cyrus of Persia. Since Media never ruled over the Jews this sequence can only be explained by supposing that Daniel is adapting the schema of Assyria, Media, Persia, and Greece that is attested in the Roman historian Aemilius Sura and in Sibylline Oracles 4 (Swain, Flusser). The introduction of this schema in the first episode of Daniel’s career gives perspective to the following stories of Gentile rule.  Collins, John J.. Daniel: Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (The Forms of the Old Testament Literature (FOTL)) (p. 52). Eerdmans. Kindle Edition. 

Many will obviously claim that the silver chest and arms must be Medo-Persia which in turn will turn the legs of iron to Rome.

The Third Kingdom

Although little could be said by Daniel concerning the second, the third "will rule with power over all the earth".

[Dan 2:39b LSB]  ...then another third kingdom of bronze, which will rule with power over all the earth.

The belly and thighs of bronze belong to Cyrus the Persian.  At the time of Cyrus’s death in 530 BC, the Achaemenid Empire he founded was already the largest empire the world had ever seen.

This is the same "Cyrus the Great" who we've recently heard about in the news on the hostage release... comparing Trump to "Cyrus the Great". Cyrus released the Jewish exiles, from Babylonian captivity, and sent them back to Jerusalem to rebuild their Temple.

[Dan 10:1 LSB]  In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia...

[Isa 45:1-3 LSB]  Thus says Yahweh to Cyrus His anointed, Whom I have taken hold of by his right hand, To subdue nations before him And to loose the loins of kings, To open doors before him so that gates will not be shut: [2]  “I will go before you and make the rough places smooth; I will shatter the doors of bronze and cut through their iron bars. [3]  “I will give you the treasures of darkness And hidden wealth of secret places, So that you may know that it is I, Yahweh, the God of Israel, who calls you by your name.

[2Ch 36:22-23 LSB]  Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia—in order to complete the word of Yahweh by the mouth of Jeremiah—Yahweh stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he had a proclamation pass throughout his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying, [23]  “Thus says Cyrus king of Persia, ‘Yahweh, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and He has appointed me to build Him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whoever there is among you of all His people, may Yahweh his God be with him, and let him go up!’”

Cyrus of Persia is not in dispute with anyone.  As seen above, most will combine the Medes and Persians into the Medo-Persian empire.  This is not what Daniel clearly tells us though.  Regardless of what history tells us, Daniel points to the Mede as succeeding Babylon.  This brings us to the legs of iron and Alexander the Great.

The Fourth Kingdom

[Dan 2:40 LSB]  Then there will be a fourth kingdom as strong as iron; inasmuch as iron crushes and shatters all things, so, like iron that breaks in pieces, it will crush and break all these in pieces.

This fourth kingdom is seen as the turning point in history. Its difference from the others is represented in terms of its destructiveness. Its symbolic material, iron, is identified as that which "shatters and breaks everything" (Dan 2:40a), reflecting the rapid, violent, and destructive impact of the Hellenistic conquest of the Persian Empire.

Alexander the Great, in only four major battles (Granicus 334, Issus 333, Gaugamela 331, Persian Gate 330), completely destroyed the 200-year-old Achaemenid Empire in less than four years. The Persian royal army was annihilated, Persepolis (the ceremonial capital) was burned, Darius III was murdered by his own men, and the entire empire from Egypt to India submitted to a 25–30-year-old Macedonian king. This is the fastest, most total, military collapse of a world empire in ancient history.

Despite the fact that Alexander presented himself in many ways as the successor to the Persian kings, there is no indication that Greek historians added Greece as the fourth kingdom in an attempt to appropriate the schema as legitimizing propaganda for any of the Hellenistic kingdoms.  Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (p. 80). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition. 

The fourth kingdom is said to "shatter and crush all these" (Dan 2:40b), referring to the three previous kingdoms.  The imagery has both a cultural and a symbolic significance.

In some sense the Hellenistic Empire was seen to constitute a break from the previous sequence of Near Eastern kingdoms (cf. Dan 7:7) and thus to represent a particularly significant moment in the historical process, a judgment that many modern historians share. More importantly, the action of the fourth kingdom in destroying all its predecessors anticipates what is ascribed to the everlasting kingdom (vv. 35, 44). Through this imagery the fourth kingdom is framed as the definitive counterpart to the final kingdom that the God of heaven will raise up. It is the negative shadow of that kingdom.  Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (p. 82). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition.

Greece has exerted the deepest and most lasting philosophical and theological influence on the Western (and much of the global) world—far more than any other single culture.

All of the west's education system rests on the shoulders of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Questions of being, substance, and cause - come from Aristotle. The world of forms versus matter come from Plato. They also gave us the ideas of constitutionalism, democracy, and republicanism. The list could go on, and on. Almost every major Western philosopher (Augustine, Aquinas, Descartes, Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, etc.) is either building upon or reacting against Greek philosophy. Christianity as it spread through the Roman Empire and then Europe became a Greco-Christian synthesis. Gnosticism is rampant in today's church here in the west... Greece has it's fingerprints all over everything!

It is this entire Greek worldview that Yeshua will smash to pieces on His return.

[Dan 2:41 LSB]  Now in that you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron; it will be a divided kingdom; but it will have in it the toughness of iron, inasmuch as you saw the iron mixed with common clay.

Alexander's Empire was divided, at his death, amongst his primary generals.

From the perspective of the Near East, the primary division was Ptolemy, who ruled from Egypt, and Seleucus, whose base of power was in Mesopotamia and Syria.  It was the Seleucid Empire that Antiochus Epiphanes came from.  We'll get to him in detail in another blog.

[Dan 2:42 LSB]  And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so some of the kingdom will be strong and part of it will be brittle.

Verse 41 comments upon the inherent instability of a divided kingdom, though emphasizing the residual strength represented by the element of iron. In comparison, v. 42 emphasizes equally the strength and weakness of the two parts of the kingdom, perhaps alluding to the shifting balance of power between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kingdoms.  Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (p. 82). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition. 

[Dan 2:43 LSB]  And in that you saw the iron mixed with common clay; they will combine with one another in the seed of men; but they will not cling to one another, even as iron does not combine with clay.

Reinterpreting a phrase from v. 41 concerning the “mixing” of iron and pottery as (lit.) “mixing by human seed but not clinging together,” v. 43 provides the most salient clue to particular historical events. This imagery most plausibly refers to the dynastic intermarriages between the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, those of Antiochus II to Berenice in 252 B.C.E. and of Ptolemy V Epiphanes to Cleopatra, daughter of Antiochus III, in 193–92, neither of which achieved a lasting detente between the two kingdoms. Both marriages are referred to in Dan 11:6, 17.  Newsom, Carol A.. Daniel: A Commentary (The Old Testament Library) (pp. 82-83). Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Kindle Edition. 
The statue is now clearly defined. From the standpoint of the author and the first readers in the Babylonian and early Persian period, the four kingdoms were certainly understood as:

1. Babylon (gold)
2. Media (silver)
3. Persia (bronze)
4. Greece (iron)

Daniel 8 explicitly names "Media" and "Persia" as two separate horn entities, then the he-goat (yavan) smashes the ram (Medo-Persia) and becomes "very great" until its great horn is broken and four kingdoms arise.

Click Here! for a discussion on the word "yavan". The "stone cut without hands" was expected to smash the Greek/Hellenistic world-order and set up God’s eternal kingdom. I will go into this in a separate blog: Click Here!

All of the above leaves us with:

[1]  Head of Gold - Babylon
[2]  Chest and Arms of Silver - Media
[3]  Belly and Thighs of Bronze - Persia
[4]  Legs of Iron - Greece

How does all of this shape up with the beasts of Daniel 7 and the rest of Scripture?  Perfectly!  Everything comes into a beautiful, picture perfect, focused, roadmap for us to follow!

Click Here! for the four beasts of Daniel 7.

[Mat 24:15 LSB]  Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand)...