Before embarking on a detailed study of the Four Beasts of chapter 7, it is convenient to examine with some care the verses about the heavenly Being described here.

There is a commonly held theory that:

This is quite wrong, as will be seen by and by. Apart from all the mass of Bible evidence, the two titles, when so applied, are hopeless misnomers. Who could ‘the Ancient of Days’ be but the Almighty Himself? and ‘Son of Man’ is, of course, the Lord Jesus.

To settle this last identification first:

1. Jesus applied the title ‘Son of Man’ to himself some 80? times. Attempts have been made, with little convincingness, to link this Name with (i) Ezekiel, also called ‘son of man’, and (ii) Psalm 8:4. The second of these might have a certain relevance, but it dwindles away to near-zero importance when compared with the subjoined passages:
2. “The sign of the Son of man in heaven…and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Mt. 24:30). This is the language of Dan. 7:13. The next verse also has multitudes of angels, as in Dan. 7:10.
3. “Hereafter ye shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power (the Ancient of Days?), and coming in the clouds of heaven” (Mt. 26:64).
4. “Upon the cloud one like unto the Son of man…a golden crown and…a sharp sickle” (Rev. 14:14). Compare also: “One like unto the Son of man…he cometh with the clouds” (Rev. 1:13,7).
5. “Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing at the right hand of God” (Acts 7:56).

He would be a brave (foolhardy?) man who would deny the connection between the foregoing passages and Daniel 7:13. But this is only a beginning. There is much more Bible witness to equate the Daniel Vision with the Father and His glorified Son.

For example, there is much correspondence between the vision of the Ancient of days and the remarkable descriptions of the Almighty enthroned, in Ezekiel 1:16-20,27 and in Revelation 4:3,5,6; 5:6,7. Other appropriate Scriptures, all about the Glory of Jehovah, and the radiance, the fire, and the wheels, are: Ps. 104:2; 18:8- 13; 50: 1-4; 1 Chr. 28:18. The multitude of angels round the throne in Daniel 7:10 is matched by Rev. 5:11; Dt. 33:2; Ps. 68:17. And the “fiery stream issuing forth from the throne” has its probable counterpart in the “firmament”, the “paved work of a sapphire stone”, the “sea of glass” (Ez. 1: 25,26; Ex. 24: 10; Rev. 4:6; 15:2).

If it be argued that the very expression: “the hair of his head like pure wool” (v.9) is identical with the symbolic description of the glorified “Son of man” in Rev. 1: 14, this does not prove identity, for Jesus himself declared that “the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father” (Mt. 16:27), so of course such resemblances are to be expected.

It is a similar misreading of the prophecy, which led to the mistaken identification of ‘the Son of Man’ with ‘the saints, the true believers.’ “There was given him (the Son of man) dominion, and glory, and a kingdom…that all people should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion…”(7:14). Put “the kingdom and dominion and greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High” (7:27). Therefore, it has been erroneously concluded: ‘Son of man’ = ‘the saints (true believers)’. This is short-sighted. If the kingdom is given to Messiah, will it not also be given to Messiah’s men? What sort of “proof” is this?

Amid all these resemblances there is one important difference, which calls for explanation. The first group of passages cited describes the Son of man as “coming” i.e. returning to the earth (a re-reading of them will leave no other possibility), whereas Daniel 7 and Revelation 5:6,7 show the Son of man being presented before the throne of his Father.

A simple explanation is available: The last two passages (like Acts 1:11: ascension in a cloud) describe the glorious reception of the risen Lord in the presence of his Father. It is perhaps possible to go further and read the Daniel 7:13 scenario as the heavenly counterpart to the Day of Atonement, when the High Priest entered into the Holy of Holies with clouds of incense and the atoning blood of an acceptable Sacrifice. This need not be insisted on, but in view of the Leviticus 16 prototype it seems not unlikely.

Just as the four beasts correspond to the four empires of Nebuchadnezzar’s metallic image, so also the ten horns of the fourth beast repeat the idea of the ten toes of the image. And since good reason has been found for seeking a ten-toe fulfilment in the Last Days, so also with the ten horns. The evidence for such a conclusion becomes insuperable.

It is a matter of first-rate importance to observe that the details in Daniel 7 about the Little Horn are repeated in Revelation 13 about the Beast described there in v.1-13.

1. a mouth speaking great things (v.25; 13:5)
2. it continued “forty and two months”—”a time, times and dividing of time” (v.25; 13:5).
3. made war with “the saints” (v.25; 13:7).
4. destroyed “unto the end” (v.26; 17:14).
5. with the characteristics of the four preceding oppressors of “the saints” (13:2).

Thus, if the principle of interpretation of Scripture by Scripture is worth anything at all, the conclusion follows that the Beast of Revelation is a kind of blown-up version of the Little Horn.

The old commentators saw this conclusion clearly, but in their admirable anti-papal campaign, and misled by the utterly unfounded year-for-a-day interpretation of time periods, they sought an artificial reference to a ‘continuous historic’ fulfilment spread over long centuries.

But there are too many difficulties against acceptance of this view:

1. the three uprooted horns have to be equated with the three papal states and the pope’s temporal power.

   But this is a ‘fulfilment’ just too trivial, so unimportant, in fact, that most of the history books do not even mention it.

2. “saints” has to be read as meaning ‘the true believers’, especially in the time of the Reformation. But this is against all Old Testament usage of “saints”, where in Psalms (many) and Daniel especially, the reference is to Israel, the holy people; e.g. Daniel 12:7 (s.w.); 8:24.

3. this persecution lasts “until the Ancient of days comes” (the final divine intervention). But papal persecution of Protestants ceased two hundred years ago, and still no heavenly kingdom. (It is ironic that most of the persecution of true believers in Reformation times came from bigoted Protestants and not from the Catholic Church).

4. “Until a time, times, and the dividing of time.” Traditionally this has been turned into 3½ x 360 days (years!), and applied to the long drawn-out period of papal “dominion”. All these 1260 year computations gave out a long time ago, yet still the “Ancient of days” is not manifest. What has gone wrong with the calculation?

It is high time to start again with a more convincing (Biblical) interpretation.

All the details in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13, 17 call for reference to the Last Days and to a political power oppressing Israel, “the saints”, God’s holy people, in the last 3½-years of their tribulation. Daniel 12:7 is surely decisive on this point: “It shall be for a time, times, and a half, when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.”

This harmonizes with all the other details—ten toes in the Last Days destroyed by the Stone, three horns uprooted by one which arises after the others, the final oppression of Israel, ten kings giving their power and strength to the Beast to enable him to make war with the Lamb who overcomes as King of kings and Lord of lords.

All the 3½-year references in Daniel and Revelation fit neatly into this scenario. So also does the Elijah prophecy in Malachi 4; for twice the New Testament emphasizes that the significant part of the ministry of that prophet lasted for “three years and six months” (Lk. 4:25; Jas. 5:17), a feature to be repeated in the Last Days. More on this in connection with the ‘Seventy Weeks’ prophecy).

Then “the Beast is slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame” (7:11; Rev. 19:20).

Attention needs to be given to the disturbed historical order of some of the main chapters in Daniel. Their chronological order is, strictly, 7,8,5,9,6,10-12.

There is still a good deal of argument about the dramatis personae in ch. 5— Belshazzar, the queen, and Darius especially.

The sequence of Babylonian rulers is now fairly well settled:

Nebuchadnezzar’s long reign (44 years?) was followed by the brief rule of his son Evil-Merodach (2 years). Neriglissar, Nebuchadnezzar’s son-in-law, followed but not for long. Then a boy-king Laborosoarchod was a mere 9 year-old, who was speedily got rid of by Nabonidus, the high priest of the temple in Haran.

At the time that Daniel 5 begins, Nabonidus was with his army out in the country, either hoping to stop Persian invasion or else anxious not to get he shut up in an indefensible city. So his son Belshazzar was acting king in Babylon and inclined to enjoy the opportunities that were now his! Legal documents of the 12th and 13th years of Nabonidus mention Belshazzar as crown-prince.

It was probably the anniversary of the capture of Jerusalem in Zedekiah’s reign (so says the Talmud), which sparked off the idea of indulging in some good anti-Semitic gloating at a special celebration. All the glorious holy vessels, the seven branched candlestick included, were brought out, and the great concourse of lords and “ladies” settled down to a self-congratulatory orgy of hard drinking.

Would not the gods who had granted such success against the Jews be reminded of their obligation to grant a similar glorious victory over the Persians? Was this “praising of the gods of gold and silver” the origin of the futile modern practice of drinking toasts?

Alas, this “godliness” worked in reverse. Cyrus, knowing what was afoot, was content to wait outside Babylon’s defensive inefficiency.

That very banqueting hall has been disinterred from the rubble by the archeologists.

A B: the royal recess, the king’s table.

C D: was a wall of white gypsum, its quality still traceable. Probably much of it was covered with a record of past national exploits. And there were massive doors of cedar wood.

It was in this setting that a hand began to write on the wall. The experience turned Belshazzar to soberness and terror within a minute. His countenance (literally, “his brightness”, for he was ‘lit up’) changed as speedily as Herodias’s Herod. “His loins were loosed” (diarrhoea?)

There was a frantic call for the professional interpreters of portents. But these men knew better than to speak plainly what they suspected the meaning to be (they were probably in conspiracy with the Persians already). So they played for safety, and pleaded ignorance. Nebuchadnezzar would have seen through them.

“I must know”, Belshazzar insisted. And in the nick of time help came from Nitocris, the queen. Originally the wife of Nebuchadnezzar, she had been taken as consort (for diplomatic reasons) by Nabonidus. This queen-mother, not so fuddled as the rest, bethought her of Daniel, who at this time was probably in retirement (8:27). “He can shew hard sentences” — Daniel’s study of the Scriptures had been noted.

The prophet’s response to the king’s blandishments and promises was curt enough (v.22, 23; contrast 4:19). With a warning about Nebuchadnezzar’s experience, he proceeded to the meaning of the revelation. The Babylonians believed in the existence of Bel-Merodach’s “Book of Fate”, and were probably thinking about this now.

MENE: the days of your kingdom are numbered. For special emphasis this warning was repeated.

TEKEL (the word is related to the Hebrew Shekel): your person and your policies are weighed with unerring divine judgment; you are found wanting.

PERES (the word was deliberately used to suggest “Persians”; but it is closely associated with a familiar Hebrew word for “broken down” or “break in”, which is precisely what was to happen that night. But why the strange variant?

UPHARSIN? The prefix is simply the Aramaic conjunction for “and”; and the additional end syllable is the form of the plural—in this case an intensive plural; it will certainly happen, and the division of the kingdom will be ruinous.

It was!

The situation of Daniel 2 was repeating itself: The king eager to know the meaning of his dream, the magicians just as false, then Daniel unfolds a revelation of divine control over Babylon.

It is something of a surprise that, after the former exposure of soothsaying inadequacy, Nebuchadnezzar had not rid himself of these mountebanks. Perhaps the consolidated influence of the priesthood (the “Chaldeans”) had been too much for him. The professed inability of these learned men to interpret the dream about the felling of a luxurious tree was probably put on. It would be easy to see that only a dire meaning could attach to the dream, and they were unwilling to risk further unpopularity with the king by imparting a discouraging message.

So they left it to Daniel. Was he really “the master of the magicians”? Or is that phrase intended to mean that he was the pick of the lot? And why should he appear after all the rest? The record does not explain.

There was reluctance in Daniel also. Put, urged by the king, he told plainly what the dream portended. He added his own exhortation to repentance, and apparently this was heeded, for a while; for the fulfilment was deferred for a year. Perhaps the memory of the warning faded from the king’s mind, and his native pride of achievement took over once again.

It is said that Amytis, his queen, came from the mountains of Elam, and in the dead flat plain of Mesopotamia she sighed for her native land.

“You want mountains, my dear?” said Nebuchadnezzar, “you shall have them”—and he proceeded to fashion one of the wonders of the ancient world, the hanging gardens of Babylon.

It was in the midst of this wonderful creation that he boasted: “Is not this great Babylon that I have built for the honour of my majesty and the glory of my power? “

Then judgment fell. The king was overcome with a highly unusual disease— lycanthropy—that drove him to the instincts and habits of an animal. The archaeologists have commented on a remarkable gap of about seven years in the documents and history of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign (see Rendle Short: “Modern Discovery…” p.l46).

Then came recovery, and with it a thankful acknowledgement of the control of the Most High. The king’s confession of faith (v.1-3,37) stamps him as a man of high religious spirit; and various Nebuchadnezzar inscriptions express similar devoutness.

For the student of the Last Days, special interest attaches to that period of “seven times”. A popular interpretation has been on these lines:

This period, measured from a suitable year in Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, terminates at 1914 A.D.

Thus—so it is argued—there is here a prophecy of the madness of the nations.

In this remarkable sequence of “reasoning” every detail is debatable except one: the “seven times” does mean “seven literal years”. All the rest is cloud-cuckoo land, especially the idea that the madness of the nations would last until 1914, for never has the Gentile world been so mad as since 1914.

Do readers need further warnings against the foolishness of such interpretations as these?

Daniel ch. 4 Additional Notes

Nebuchadnezzar was very keen on felling cedars in Lebanon—he did it personally:

    “Under her shadow (Babylon) I gathered all even in peace.”

    “Mighty cedars with my own hands I cut down.”

    “Merodach … may my woodcutting prosper.”

        Bas-relief in Wadi Brissa: “image of my royal person” felling cedars.

10.	Based on Ez. 31 :3ff, 13.
14.	Fate same as Assyria, and for same reason.
16.	“For four years all public works ceased”.
17.	basest = lowest. Nabopolassar “son of a nobody—me—the magnificent .”
17.	Isaiah 10:5 provides an earlier illustration.
25,27	Predestination and contingency, here side by side.
30.	E.g. Nebuchadnezzar’s Euphrates bridge 134yds x 69ft wide.
	7 yrs. It is a tribute to his character that his rule was not usurped.

Here, there can be little doubt, is the counterpart to the four empires foretold through the symbolism of Nebuchadnezzar’s image. But a prophet of the Lord saw this vision; so, whereas the king saw bright impressive metals as symbols of human might, Daniel saw them as four horrible beasts. The reason for the repetition in a different form is simply explained by Genesis 41:32.

These four beasts are described as coming up from the sea. Accordingly, attempts have been made to interpret this detail as indicating their origination in the Mediterranean, the Great Sea. This will not do, for concerning Babylon and Persia it is simply not true.

More probably the “sea” is the fiery stream (Dan. 7: 10), the firmament (Ez. 1:25,26), the paved work of a sapphire stone (Ex. 24:10), the sea of glass (Rev. 4:6; 15:2) before the throne of the Almighty. In other words, these empires only rose to power through the design and control of heaven. Some would go even further, and suggest that the four foul beasts are representations of four angels of evil doing God’s inscrutable work among the nations of the world.

Verse 3 neatly introduces a quote from God’s promise to Abraham (Gen. 22:17): “the sand of the sea”; a subtle hint that the prophecy is about Israel, the natural seed of Abraham and their enemies (cp. Rev. 13:1).

Confirmation of this conclusion, that the four empires are the oppressors of Israel comes from recognition that this vision was anticipated in Hosea 13:7,8, where note especially: “they (Israel) have forgotten me… “O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself” (v.6,9).

The lion with eagle’s wings was already familiar to Daniel as a symbol of Assyria and Babylon, for in both countries such figures guarded temple and palace entrances. (For a Biblical interpretation see Jeremiah 49: 19; 50: 17). Cyrus’s bas-relief at Persepolis shows Babylon like a lion and his sword in its guts. Jeremiah’s writings, documents in Daniel’s library (9:2), had the same idea.

This beast was “made to stand upon its feet as a man, and a man’s heart was given to it” (7:4). This was not prophecy, but history, recalling the remarkable experience of Nebuchadnezzar’s recovery from animal madness (ch.4).

The bear, a mountain beast, was an easy figure of the threatening power of Persia. Its being raised up on one side anticipated the greater exaltation of the Persians over the earlier threat of the Medes.

All kinds of interpretations have been advanced to explain the “three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it” (v.5):

1. The northern conquests specified in Jeremiah 51:27.
2. The three much more important conquests: Babylon, Lydia, and Egypt.
3. Three directions of territorial expansion: NW/W/SW.

The third beast, a fast-moving winged leopard, is a fitting symbol of the Greek empire. It took Alexander the Great only ten years to extend his conquests as far as India. The four wings and four heads suggest the sub-division of the empire into four territories, each ruled by one of Alexander’s generals.

The fourth beast, “dreadful and terrible”, is unquestionably Rome. The emphasis on its “great iron teeth” suggests a correspondence with the legs of iron in the image. And “brake in pieces” is the very phrase used about the fourth empire in Daniel 2:40.

The fate of these four beasts is summed up succinctly: “they had their dominion taken away, yet (before that transpired) their lives were prolonged for a season and a time” (7:12). Possibly, but not certainly this last phrase refers to the Passover (“time”) when the Roman siege of Jerusalem began, and the “season” was the five month’s duration of the siege when the Gentile down-treading of the holy city brought all to an end. (On this, see commentary on Daniel 8).

Because of its very familiarity, the main outline of this remarkable revelation will be treated in relatively brief fashion. Indeed, the only valid reason for spending time on it here is the often-unrecognised fact that certain features of the king’s dream seem traditionally to have been misconstrued.

“Thou art this head of gold” explains why king Nebuchadnezzar should have been so very insistent in his demands for an elucidation of the vision. Of course, before this, he had had many another dreams, which had been dismissed from serious attention (if not already gone from memory). But this one was stamped in his mind and was a worry to him because the image, which he had seen, had his own features: “Thou art this head of gold.”

The AV reading of the king’s words has misled many readers: “The thing is gone from me.” This is not equivalent to: ‘I have forgotten what the dream was about.’ Had it been so, there would have been none of this royal excitement.

More exactly, the king’s dictum was: “The word is gone forth from me”— with reference to the peremptory edict: ‘Either you tell me the dream and its interpretation, or I chop your heads off!’

The sheer unreasonableness of this demand (as the hot-round-the-collar magicians and Chaldeans saw it) was prompted by the shrewd monarch’s suspicion that “Ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me— until the time be changed.” This last phrase takes on a sinister meaning when it is noted that in that historical period “times” were measured from the accession year of each king (see ch. 2:1, and so throughout the book). Thus, “till the time be changed” implied a new king on the throne. These wily priests, faced with a demand contrary to all their trade union rules, were quite capable of resolving their dilemma with a spoonful of strychnine in their master’s morning cup of tea!

This Nebuchadnezzar was no fool!

As junior members of the professional guild, Daniel and his three friends were also under threat. It called for a very high degree of faith to believe that their God would respond to their need in this emergency.

Nebuchadnezzar must have been both amazed and amused by the cool assurance of this teen-ager before him that his outrageous demand would be fully met.

When Daniel appeared in the royal presence again next day, the cynical look on the king’s countenance may well be imagined. But it needed only one sentence from this young Hebrew, and the king was on the edge of his throne, staring in wide-eyed astonishment: “Thou, O king, sawest, and beheld a great image.” Here for sure, was no charlatan like the rest.

Within minutes confidence in the young prophet was consolidated by full details of the dream. And Nebuchadnezzar knew that he could also depend on the accuracy of the interpretation now to be unfolded.

Alas, the same can hardly be said about the interpretations so often unfolded in this twentieth century!

That the segments of that impressive image represent a chronological sequence of empires can hardly be doubted. And if there were nothing more in the vision than this main idea the interpretation would be impressive:

Babylon—Persia—Greece—Rome. The sequence and character of these empires has often been commented on. The aptness and accuracy of the successive parts are something to marvel at.

But all too easily a twofold difficulty has been constantly glossed over:

• Why should world history suddenly become the quite new feature of Old Testament prophecy?

• Why should this sequence of world empires be so blatantly incomplete?

This last point needs to be underlined. The truth is that since the days of the fourth (Roman) empire, the world has seen plenty of other empires as extensive and as long-lasting as the four, which preceded them:

Genghis Khan had an empire, which stretched right across Asia. Philip II of Spain ruled an empire covering a large part of Europe and the whole of Central and South America. Here was grandeur to make golden Babylon look ordinary. Napoleon’s genius defeated every army he came against. Even Alexander’s achievements look small at the side of his. And for two centuries the British Empire sprawled great splashes of red right round the globe. That empire was, in all respects, easily the greatest of them all.

Then if this revelation to Nebuchadnezzar was intended to be a conspectus of world history, why these amazing omissions? What the vision included was magnificently accurate. Put why so incomplete?

Careful attention to certain of the image details supplies a fully convincing explanation:

• “After thee (Nebuchadnezzar) shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee” (v.39). And this is all that is revealed here about the Persian Empire. The reason is simple: Already, in the early days of Nebuchadnezzar, Medes and Persians were becoming troublesome. Within a lifetime their aggressive spirit was to prove overmastering. So it was hardly tactful to dwell at length on this silver part of the image. Also it needs to be recognised that “inferior to thee” is an altogether inaccurate description of the Persian Empire. It was stronger, better organized, and more long-lasting than Babylon. The words simply mean “lower down” (in the image). They indicate that Daniel was working his way systematically through the details of the vision.

• “And another kingdom of brass which shall bear rule over all the earth.” But, for certain, the Greek empire did not bear rule over all the earth, not even over all the civilised world of that time. Here, once again, students have been at the mercy of King James’s translators with their failure to recognize that right through the Bible—Old Testament and New Testament—the words for “earth” and “land (of Israel)” are interchangeable. Only context can decide which reading is called for. Here the phrase clearly alludes to the instantaneous appropriation of the state of Judea by the advancing Alexander.

• Most decisive of all are the details about the Iron kingdom of Rome. “as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things…shall it break in pieces and bruise (crush)” (v.40). Yet in point of fact the Roman regime did not have this character. Wherever the legions went, there followed the blessings of law and order. The pax Romana provided the civilised world with its most wonderful era of peace and settled government. To that general rule there was one quite striking exception. The Jews in Palestine proved to be the most turbulent province of the empire, until at last in the war of A.D.67-70 (and again in 135) Roman patience gave out, and all the towns and cities were ruthlessly devastated. “Break in pieces and crush” became the most exact part of the prophecy regarding Israel!

In these details there is supplied a highly important clue concerning Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. It was not a revelation of world history. It was a revelation of the sequence of Gentile powers that would completely dominate the People of God in their own Land. It was made known to the king of Babylon because he was the first to incorporate the Holy Land in his empire (Sennacherib the Assyrian had tried and failed—hence the omission of Assyria from the sequence).

It is now possible to put a finger on another error in the traditional interpretation of Daniel 2. For generations it has been asserted that the ten toes, part iron, part clay, strong and weak, represent the subdivisions of the Roman Empire covering the period from (roughly) the 7th century to the 20th. Which ten? Here a. good deal of guesswork comes into play. In “Elpis Israel”, page 326f., two separate lists are submitted for approval. Today neither of these carries conviction. In the last thing he wrote, Dr. Thomas (“Exposition of Daniel” p.13) suggested that no accurate identification need be looked for until the Last Days. This was a wise assessment.

Let it be remembered that, according to the clue now brought to light, the vision is about the oppressors of Israel in the Holy Land. When at last they were scattered far and wide, this history — God’s history — was drastically interrupted; and this state of affairs continued until the Zionist movement in this century. Then, and only then, does the vision—God’s history regarding His Chosen People—resume its relevance. In other words, the ten toes, weak and strong, do not represent a long period of European history (that idea beloved of so many politically-biased expositors); it represents ten enemies of Israel who are to dominate the State of Israel in the Last Days immediately before the impact of the Stone, the Messiah.

That the Stone does symbolise the Messiah, coming in power and glory, can hardly be doubted. Daniel’s own explanation is clear enough: “In the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed” (v.44). And Jesus identified the Stone with himself when he declared: “And upon whomsoever that Stone shall fall, it will grind him to powder” (v.35; Mt. 21:44).

A number of other details call for explanation.

For instance, why should the Stone be “cut out of the mountain without hands” (v.45)? The last phrase suggests divine, not human, origin. But ‘cut out of the mountain of humanity’ is a common expositor’s guess for which there seems to be little Biblical support.

More likely, this is intended to reinforce the idea of divine origin, for it is known that one of the chief gods in the Babylonian pantheon had the Great Mountain as a title. Nebuchadnezzar would readily understand it thus.

To some the idea of a discontinuity between legs and feet in the development of the historical fulfilment is a serious difficulty. But the reason for this has already been educed from the prophecy itself. Nor should it be forgotten that not a few outstanding Messianic prophecies exhibit exactly the same discontinuity: Luke 21:24,25; Micah 7:10,11; 5:2-5; Zechariah 9:9-11; Isaiah 61:2 (?)(See “Bible Studies”, HAW, p.98). What needs specially to be noted is that in other prophecies in Daniel (ch.8, 9 & 11—most commentators) the same kind of discontinuity is readily traceable.

Is it possible to identify the ten kings represented by the ten toes? First, since the Stone initially smashes the feet, these ten must be enemies of God’s Purpose in the Last Days. Revelation 17 reinforces this conclusion with its prophecy of ten kings who “make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them” (17:14). This was Dr. Thomas’s chief ground for insisting on identification with ten anti-Israel powers in the Last Days. What are probably the same ten can be traced in Daniel 7:7,8; Psalm 83; Isaiah 13-23 and, quite possibly, in Ezekiel 38.

Two hints are provided as to the identification of the ten: “as iron is not mixed with clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, but they shall not cleave one to another” (v.43). The verb twice used here is the word Arab. Accident? or design? The Arabs get their name from the fact that they are of such mixed descent —from Ishmael, Lot, and Esau. For copious evidence about Arab hostility to Israel in the Last Days, see “Lift up your heads” (Geo. Booker) and “Jews, Arabs, and Bible Prophecy” (HAW). “They shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, but they shall not cleave one to another” suggests a further possibility: Arabs mixed with Jews in their restored state of Israel, but showing no sign at all of blending with them. This detail of interpretation is possible but not certain.

But, it may be objected; does not the association “iron and clay” imply a continuing Roman element (cp. legs of iron)? Indeed, no! Daniel’s own explanation, surely not to be over-ridden, points in a different direction: “part of potter’s clay and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron…” (v.41). In other words, the dominant idea about the iron is not that of Rome but of strength.

1. Nebuchadnezzar’s Image (Daniel 2)

Because of its very familiarity, the main outline of this remarkable revelation will be treated in relatively brief fashion. Indeed, the only valid reason for spending time on it here is the often-unrecognised fact that certain features of the king’s dream seem traditionally to have been misconstrued.

“Thou art this head of gold” explains why king Nebuchadnezzar should have been so very insistent in his demands for an elucidation of the vision. Of course, before this, he had had many another dreams, which had been dismissed from serious attention (if not already gone from memory). But this one was stamped in his mind and was a worry to him because the image, which he had seen, had his own features: “Thou art this head of gold.”

The AV reading of the king’s words has misled many readers: “The thing is gone from me.” This is not equivalent to: ‘I have forgotten what the dream was about.’ Had it been so, there would have been none of this royal excitement.

More exactly, the king’s dictum was: “The word is gone forth from me”— with reference to the peremptory edict: ‘Either you tell me the dream and its interpretation, or I chop your heads off!’

The sheer unreasonableness of this demand (as the hot-round-the-collar magicians and Chaldeans saw it) was prompted by the shrewd monarch’s suspicion that “Ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me— until the time be changed.” This last phrase takes on a sinister meaning when it is noted that in that historical period “times” were measured from the accession year of each king (see ch. 2:1, and so throughout the book). Thus, “till the time be changed” implied a new king on the throne. These wily priests, faced with a demand contrary to all their trade union rules, were quite capable of resolving their dilemma with a spoonful of strychnine in their master’s morning cup of tea!

This Nebuchadnezzar was no fool!

As junior members of the professional guild, Daniel and his three friends were also under threat. It called for a very high degree of faith to believe that their God would respond to their need in this emergency.

Nebuchadnezzar must have been both amazed and amused by the cool assurance of this teen-ager before him that his outrageous demand would be fully met.

When Daniel appeared in the royal presence again next day, the cynical look on the king’s countenance may well be imagined. But it needed only one sentence from this young Hebrew, and the king was on the edge of his throne, staring in wide-eyed astonishment: “Thou, O king, sawest, and beheld a great image.” Here for sure, was no charlatan like the rest.

Within minutes confidence in the young prophet was consolidated by full details of the dream. And Nebuchadnezzar knew that he could also depend on the accuracy of the interpretation now to be unfolded.

Alas, the same can hardly be said about the interpretations so often unfolded in this twentieth century!

That the segments of that impressive image represent a chronological sequence of empires can hardly be doubted. And if there were nothing more in the vision than this main idea the interpretation would be impressive:

Babylon—Persia—Greece—Rome. The sequence and character of these empires has often been commented on. The aptness and accuracy of the successive parts are something to marvel at.

But all too easily a twofold difficulty has been constantly glossed over:

• Why should world history suddenly become the quite new feature of Old Testament prophecy?

• Why should this sequence of world empires be so blatantly incomplete?

This last point needs to be underlined. The truth is that since the days of the fourth (Roman) empire, the world has seen plenty of other empires as extensive and as long-lasting as the four, which preceded them:

Genghis Khan had an empire, which stretched right across Asia. Philip II of Spain ruled an empire covering a large part of Europe and the whole of Central and South America. Here was grandeur to make golden Babylon look ordinary. Napoleon’s genius defeated every army he came against. Even Alexander’s achievements look small at the side of his. And for two centuries the British Empire sprawled great splashes of red right round the globe. That empire was, in all respects, easily the greatest of them all.

Then if this revelation to Nebuchadnezzar was intended to be a conspectus of world history, why these amazing omissions? What the vision included was magnificently accurate. Put why so incomplete?

Careful attention to certain of the image details supplies a fully convincing explanation:

• “After thee (Nebuchadnezzar) shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee” (v.39). And this is all that is revealed here about the Persian Empire. The reason is simple: Already, in the early days of Nebuchadnezzar, Medes and Persians were becoming troublesome. Within a lifetime their aggressive spirit was to prove overmastering. So it was hardly tactful to dwell at length on this silver part of the image. Also it needs to be recognised that “inferior to thee” is an altogether inaccurate description of the Persian Empire. It was stronger, better organized, and more long-lasting than Babylon. The words simply mean “lower down” (in the image). They indicate that Daniel was working his way systematically through the details of the vision.

• “And another kingdom of brass which shall bear rule over all the earth.” But, for certain, the Greek empire did not bear rule over all the earth, not even over all the civilised world of that time. Here, once again, students have been at the mercy of King James’s translators with their failure to recognize that right through the Bible—Old Testament and New Testament—the words for “earth” and “land (of Israel)” are interchangeable. Only context can decide which reading is called for. Here the phrase clearly alludes to the instantaneous appropriation of the state of Judea by the advancing Alexander.

• Most decisive of all are the details about the Iron kingdom of Rome. “as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things…shall it break in pieces and bruise (crush)” (v.40). Yet in point of fact the Roman regime did not have this character. Wherever the legions went, there followed the blessings of law and order. The pax Romana provided the civilised world with its most wonderful era of peace and settled government. To that general rule there was one quite striking exception. The Jews in Palestine proved to be the most turbulent province of the empire, until at last in the war of A.D.67-70 (and again in 135) Roman patience gave out, and all the towns and cities were ruthlessly devastated. “Break in pieces and crush” became the most exact part of the prophecy regarding Israel!

In these details there is supplied a highly important clue concerning Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. It was not a revelation of world history. It was a revelation of the sequence of Gentile powers that would completely dominate the People of God in their own Land. It was made known to the king of Babylon because he was the first to incorporate the Holy Land in his empire (Sennacherib the Assyrian had tried and failed—hence the omission of Assyria from the sequence).

It is now possible to put a finger on another error in the traditional interpretation of Daniel 2. For generations it has been asserted that the ten toes, part iron, part clay, strong and weak, represent the subdivisions of the Roman Empire covering the period from (roughly) the 7th century to the 20th. Which ten? Here a. good deal of guesswork comes into play. In “Elpis Israel”, page 326f., two separate lists are submitted for approval. Today neither of these carries conviction. In the last thing he wrote, Dr. Thomas (“Exposition of Daniel” p.13) suggested that no accurate identification need be looked for until the Last Days. This was a wise assessment.

Let it be remembered that, according to the clue now brought to light, the vision is about the oppressors of Israel in the Holy Land. When at last they were scattered far and wide, this history — God’s history — was drastically interrupted; and this state of affairs continued until the Zionist movement in this century. Then, and only then, does the vision—God’s history regarding His Chosen People—resume its relevance. In other words, the ten toes, weak and strong, do not represent a long period of European history (that idea beloved of so many politically-biased expositors); it represents ten enemies of Israel who are to dominate the State of Israel in the Last Days immediately before the impact of the Stone, the Messiah.

That the Stone does symbolise the Messiah, coming in power and glory, can hardly be doubted. Daniel’s own explanation is clear enough: “In the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed” (v.44). And Jesus identified the Stone with himself when he declared: “And upon whomsoever that Stone shall fall, it will grind him to powder” (v.35; Mt. 21:44).

A number of other details call for explanation.

For instance, why should the Stone be “cut out of the mountain without hands” (v.45)? The last phrase suggests divine, not human, origin. But ‘cut out of the mountain of humanity’ is a common expositor’s guess for which there seems to be little Biblical support.

More likely, this is intended to reinforce the idea of divine origin, for it is known that one of the chief gods in the Babylonian pantheon had the Great Mountain as a title. Nebuchadnezzar would readily understand it thus.

To some the idea of a discontinuity between legs and feet in the development of the historical fulfilment is a serious difficulty. But the reason for this has already been educed from the prophecy itself. Nor should it be forgotten that not a few outstanding Messianic prophecies exhibit exactly the same discontinuity: Luke 21:24,25; Micah 7:10,11; 5:2-5; Zechariah 9:9-11; Isaiah 61:2 (?)(See “Bible Studies”, HAW, p.98). What needs specially to be noted is that in other prophecies in Daniel (ch.8, 9 & 11—most commentators) the same kind of discontinuity is readily traceable.

Is it possible to identify the ten kings represented by the ten toes? First, since the Stone initially smashes the feet, these ten must be enemies of God’s Purpose in the Last Days. Revelation 17 reinforces this conclusion with its prophecy of ten kings who “make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them” (17:14). This was Dr. Thomas’s chief ground for insisting on identification with ten anti-Israel powers in the Last Days. What are probably the same ten can be traced in Daniel 7:7,8; Psalm 83; Isaiah 13-23 and, quite possibly, in Ezekiel 38.

Two hints are provided as to the identification of the ten: “as iron is not mixed with clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, but they shall not cleave one to another” (v.43). The verb twice used here is the word Arab. Accident? or design? The Arabs get their name from the fact that they are of such mixed descent —from Ishmael, Lot, and Esau. For copious evidence about Arab hostility to Israel in the Last Days, see “Lift up your heads” (Geo. Booker) and “Jews, Arabs, and Bible Prophecy” (HAW). “They shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, but they shall not cleave one to another” suggests a further possibility: Arabs mixed with Jews in their restored state of Israel, but showing no sign at all of blending with them. This detail of interpretation is possible but not certain.

But, it may be objected; does not the association “iron and clay” imply a continuing Roman element (cp. legs of iron)? Indeed, no! Daniel’s own explanation, surely not to be over-ridden, points in a different direction: “part of potter’s clay and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron…” (v.41). In other words, the dominant idea about the iron is not that of Rome but of strength.

At first sight there is little in Isaiah 26 to justify its inclusion in any apocalypse, yet it begins with the familiar phrase: “in that day,” which is such a favourite of both Isaiah and Zechariah when their inspiration ranges forward to the Day of the Lord. Here it recurs five times (25: 9; 26: 1; 27: 1, 2, 12, 13), as though to emphasize that these chapters are not to be separated from chapter 24, the most ominous of them all. Chapter 26: 13-21 is the section especially relevant to the present study.

“Lord, thy hand is lifted up (as when Moses lifted up the rod of God over Egypt and over the Red Sea), yet they see not: but they shall see thy zeal for the people (Israel), and be ashamed; yea, fire shall devour thine adversaries. Lord, thou wilt ordain (literally: judge) peace for us” (26: 11, 12) — it is a peace which can come only through judgement on ungodly nations — “for thou hast also wrought all our works for us.” There can be salvation for Israel from their enemies only when they come to this admission before God that they are unable to save themselves. All through their history and in every aspect of life they have believed in salvation through their own works. What a change of heart is pictured here!” “Lord, in trouble have they visited thee, they have poured out a prayer when thy chastening was upon them.” This is the repentance of Israel as they turn to the God of their fathers in a time when no other door of hope is open to them. “Like as a woman with child, that draweth near the time of her delivery, is in pain, and crieth out in her pangs; so have we been in thy sight” (LXX: for the Beloved — ‘David my servant who is to be their prince for ever’).

THE RESURRECTION

Because of this spiritual re-birth there comes a flood of blessing: “Thou hast increased the nation (the Hebrew text strongly tempts one to see here another Messianic allusion: Thou hast provided Joseph for the nation); thou art glorified: thou hast enlarged all the borders of the land” (v. 15).

The nation is increased yet further by another accession of strength — the resurrection to glorious immortality of all the finest and most saintly characters it has produced throughout its history: “Thy dead shall live; dead bodies shall arise.^[27] Awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust: for thy dew is as the dew of lights (does this intensive plural refer to the dawn of the Great Day of God?), and the earth shall cast forth the dead.”

As Paul insists in 1 Thessalonians 4:15 that “we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not precede them which are asleep,” so it is in Isaiah (perhaps this is the Scripture from which he learned it!): “Come, my people (it is an exhortation addressed to a community), “enter thou into thy chambers (the pronouns indicate individual response to this call), and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself for a little moment until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth (or, perhaps, the dwellers in the Land?) for their iniquity.”

The historical background to this prophecy is impressive. Devout king Hezekiah had called the people of Israel from north and south to come and keep Passover in Jerusalem. As it turned out, by this act of faith those who responded provided for their own protection and safety, for then the land was ravaged from end to end by the merciless armies of Sennacherib, and only Jerusalem remained undevastated. There, as at the first Passover, twelve legions of angels hovered in protection over the faithful (Isaiah 31:5), as they had done over the homes of the twelve tribes in Egypt at the first of all Passovers. And, as the destroying angel had gone through the homes of all families not protected by the blood of the lamb, so also in Hezekiah’s day “the angel of the Lord went forth and smote in the camp of the Assyrians.” Thus in Isaiah’s own time, the faithful had their Passover refuge when divine judgement wrought deliverance.

SAFETY

This prophecy assures the true Israel of God in the twentieth century of a similar protection in the day of wrath. As it was in the days of Noah, when the Lord said: “Come thou and all thy house into the ark … and the Lord shut him in.”

How will protection be provided for the Lord’s people in that day, and where? The idea that the saints will be taken away to Sinai or some other remote deserted place has little support in Scripture. Noah found safety in the ark, which he had prepared “by faith.” And it was “by faith” that the people of Israel kept the Passover in their own homes, made safe there by the blood of the lamb. Here Isaiah’s pointed instruction is: “Enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee.” This echoes the action of Elisha, when “he went in, and shut the door upon them twain, and prayed unto the Lord” (2 Kings 4:33); and in turn Jesus quotes Isaiah in the familiar words: “But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thine inner chamber, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father” (Matthew 6: 6).

From these words it would seem that the saints’ place of safety in the last great crisis is the place of faith and prayer—which might be anywhere! Can any more specific conclusion, as to locality, be drawn from this Scripture? By reasoning from the parallel deliverance in Hezekiah’s day (to which this passage originally referred), it may be argued with fair confidence that the place of safety will be Jerusalem, to which those who respond immediately (Luke 12: 36) to the angelic summons (Matthew 24: 31 and 25: 6) will be taken; for, at the time of the resurrection and gathering of the saints, the Lord will already be established as king in Jerusalem (Matthew 25: 31)^[28] when the days of its warfare are accomplished and it is become truly a city of peace.

THE ADVERSARIES

“In that day,” Isaiah 27 continues, “the Lord with his sore and great and strong sword (note the triple emphasis) shall punish

leviathan the swift serpent, and

leviathan the (crooked) winding serpent, and

he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.”

Here, easily identifiable, are the great political adversaries of God’s people. In Isaiah’s day the identification of them would be simplicity itself. Nineveh of Assyria is pictured as a great beast in the waters of the swift-flowing Tigris. Babylon is a similar monster in the waters of the slow meandering Euphrates, whilst Egypt is a crocodile in the vast expanse of the Nile (the word “Sea” is used in this sense in Isaiah 19: 5 and Nahum 3: 8). Any Jew of Isaiah’s own day would readily recognize the allusions.

In the Last Days their counterparts may be sought in the implacable enemies of Israel who desolate the Holy Land for the last time. Or is it possible that these should be equated with the three great beasts of Revelation?

Yet another picture of this momentous time is the final gathering of Israel: “In that day the Lord shall beat off his fruit from the channel of the River (Euphrates) unto the stream of Egypt (now referred to as ‘brook,’ RV, because its power is dwindled away), and ye shall be gathered one by one, O ye children of Israel” (27: 12). If this reading correctly interprets the figure of speech, then the picture is that of the few isolated olives being knocked off their remote branches by blows from long sticks. If, however, the RV margin be accepted: “shall beat out his corn,” then the figure is that of threshing and winnowing, and should be equated with the vision in Revelation 14: 15 of the crowned Son of man reaping the harvest of the earth with his sharp sickle.

Either way, the emphasis is on the selectivity of this final re-gathering: “Ye shall be gathered one by one.” The word “channel” in this passage emphasizes the same truth, for it is the familiar word “shibboleth” (which also means “corn”) of Judges 12: 6. Just as, in that famous incident of Jephthah’s campaign, “shibboleth” divided infallibly between friend and foe, so now in prophecy it becomes a token of a separation between those who are Israel indeed and those who are only nominal members of the nation: “And I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion” (Jeremiah 3: 14. Compare also Amos 9: 8, 9).

“In that day a great trumpet shall be blown, and they shall come which were ready to perish in the land of Assyria, and they that were outcasts in the land of Egypt (compare here the exposition of Isaiah 19: 18-20 suggested in chapter 7), and shall worship the Lord in the holy mount of Jerusalem.” It is the trumpet of Jubilee, which is sounded, carrying the news of final release from bondage. It is the great trumpet because with the seventh and last (Revelation 11: 15), the Messiah takes to him his Great power and reigns; it is “the time of the dead that they should be judged, the time to give their reward to thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and to them that fear thy name, small and great.”

[27] “together with my dead body shall they arise” springs from an attempt to make sense of the solecism in the Hebrew text. The reading given here calls for only the slightest emendation.

[28] “The Last Days” chapter 11.

The chapter division here is artificial. The burst of thanksgiving in verse 1 celebrates the assertion of divine authority in Jerusalem with which chapter 24 concluded: “O Lord, thou art my God; I will exalt thee, I will praise thy name; for thou hast done a wonder of counsels: of old are (thy) faithfulness and truth.” The last phrase, which invariably alludes to the Covenants of Promise (compare 24: 23: “his ancients”) becomes in the Big Apocalypse the name of Jesus: “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war” (Revelation 19: 11).

Similarly, “a wonder of counsels” echoes the title of Messiah in Isaiah 9: 5: “his name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor.” Thus this part of the prophecy declares itself a prophecy of Christ.

The picture of ruin and destruction of an altogether God-less civilization is continued: “Thou hast made of a city an heap; of a defenced city a ruin: a palace of strangers to be no city; it shall never be built.” The end of the works of men is a final end. Now, and for all time, the divine right of man is swept away, and honour given to the Unknown God: “Therefore shall the strong people glorify thee, the city of the terrible nations shall fear thee. For thou hast been a stronghold to the poor, a stronghold to the needy in his distress (here is the protection of the faithful remnant in the Last Days), a refuge from the storm, a shadow from the heat, when the blast of the terrible ones is as a storm against the wall.” It is the language of a nuclear age in fear from itself.

The next verse, puzzling enough in the Common Version, clamours for re-translation — perhaps thus: “With the sword of Zion thou shalt humble the noise of strangers, as when the heat burns under a Cloud (the Shekinah Glory?) a psalm shall bring down the terrible ones.”

INCOMPARABLE BEESSING

The contrasting picture of God’s blessing on His people is one of the most delightful to be found in all Isaiah’s 66 chapters.

When the Law was inaugurated at mount Sinai, Moses and the elders of Israel saw the glory of the God of Israel “and did eat and drink”—they shared a meal of fellowship in the Divine Presence. But now, when the Gospel of Christ comes to its consummation, “in this mountain (Zion; see ch. 24: 23) shall the Lord of Hosts make unto all people a feast of fat things … of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined.” Under the Law the choice fat was God’s portion, to be offered on His altar (Leviticus 3: 3-5), but now this is shared with mortal men who are mortal no longer, for they share the divine nature. “Wines well refined” is another phrase, which teaches the same truth. In this happiest of re-unions is fulfilled the implied promise of Jesus: “I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

The covering over all nations (it clearly means “people out of all nations”— see chapter 17) marks their leprous uncleanness in the sight of God (Leviticus 13:45) is now taken away. Death is swallowed up in victory and forever (the Hebrew phrase has both meanings). It is not a conquest that will need to be renewed. Tears will be wiped from off all faces, and will never flow again. For this is the final and happy uniting of the Messiah with his redeemed people: “Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him (because His very name Jehovah enshrines a purpose and a promise), we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation (in his Jesus!).” This “waiting” is not a selfish waiting but springs out of an intense eagerness to see the honour of God vindicated in a world which thinks it can do without Him: “With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early: for when thy judgements are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness. Let favour be shewed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness; in the land of uprightness will he deal unjustly, and will not behold the majesty of the Lord” (Isaiah 26: 8, 9).

This vindication of the God of Israel will necessarily involve the assertion of His authority over the nations that have done despite to His people. So the prophecy continues with words which have often been read as out of place in this context: “For in this mountain (Zion, which was once a threshing floor!) shall the hand of the Lord rest,” and the threshing floor of Jehovah shall be where such drastic divine action is most called for: “and Moab shall be trodden down under him, even as straw is trodden down in the dunghill.” This Arab enemy, the last to vaunt himself against God’s nation, will have his pride brought down “together with the spoils (or, craft) of their hands.” And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day.

The three chapters, Isaiah 24, 25, 26, present so many resemblances to the language and ideas of the Olivet Prophecy and the book of Revelation that they are often alluded to as Isaiah’s Little Apocalypse. There is a good deal to be said for this equation, especially when chapter 24 is considered in detail.

Certain similarities of phraseology and idea are traceable between that part of the prophecy and the Olivet Prophecy of Jesus:

The similarities also extend to the general shape and pattern of the prophecy. In Matthew 24, after a preliminary summary, the Lord spoke in detail with special reference to the end of the Jewish era in A.D. 70. The second half of his prophecy (from 24:29 to the end of ch. 25) refers to the time of his coming. There is good reason for believing that the first half of the prophecy will also be recapitulated in the Last Days (see ch. 14).

ISRAEL IN THE LAST DAYS

The structure of Isaiah 24 is remarkably similar. But this fact can be obscured for some readers through failure to remember that in Hebrew the word eretz has to do duty for both “earth” and “land” (the land of Israel).^[25] Many phrases in 24:1-12 seem to require special reference to Israel, and not to the whole wide world: “as with the people, so with the priest… The land is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. (What reference can these words have to Gentile nations?) Therefore hath the curse devoured the land (compare Malachi 4: 6: “Lest I come and smite the land with a curse”): therefore the inhabitants of the land are burned and few men left.”

These words, and the entire section they belong to, will — it is believed — be recapitulated in the time of Jacob’s trouble at the end of this age. In the short “bridge” passage (vv. 13-15), this probability is almost made into a certainty:

“When thus it shall be in the midst of the land among the people, there shall be as the shaking of an olive tree, and as the gleaning grapes when the vintage is done.” This (so reminiscent of the Last Day prophecy in Isaiah 17: 6) reads like a prophecy of a faithful remnant in Israel in their final tribulation. Here are the fruits of an Elijah-taught repentance. “These shall lift up their voice, they shall shout for the majesty of the Lord”—presumably when “they (the tribes of the land) see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” It is “the glory of his majesty when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth” (Isaiah 2:19).

The mysterious phrase which comes next, “they cry aloud from the sea,” becomes in the LXX version: “The waters of the sea shall be troubled,” which inevitably takes the mind once again to the Olivet prophecy: “the sea and the waves roaring.”

There follows a call to “glorify the Lord in the lights”—which phrase would surely be taken to allude to the Shekinah Glory if it were not for the parallelism: “even the name of the Lord in the isles of the sea.” Then is this an allusion to the Dispersion being called, like those in the Land, to turn to the God of their fathers? This seems to be the first of several hints of a broadening of scope of the prophecy to include the whole world.

Alternatively this allusion to “glorifying the Lord” may refer to the call of the saints, for the prophecy continues: “From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs (LXX: wonders), even glory to the Righteous One (or, perhaps, hope for the righteous man).”

MISERY AND SUFFERING

In sharp contrast with this bright picture, there ensues a sustained description of unrelieved horror and destruction:

“But I (the prophet Isaiah, because of his concern regarding ‘Jacob’s trouble’) said, My leanness, my leanness (i.e. intense starvation), woe to me! the treacherous dealers have dealt treacherously.” The situations to which these words might have reference in the Last Days are legion, but the chief competitors are the broken promises of the politicians (in this respect the shameful record of Britain with the Jews through most of the twentieth century is hard to beat), and the “crafty counsel” (Psalm 83: 4) of the inveterate Arab enemy. It is noteworthy that the prophet Jeremiah quotes verbatim this chapter (48: 42-44=Isaiah 24: 17, 18) with reference to Moab in the Last Days. And Isaiah’s own “apocalypse” has a further reference to judgement on Moab which the present passage would more than amply justify: “For in this mountain (Zion) shall the Lord rest, and Moab shall be trodden down under him, even as straw is trodden down for the dunghill” (25: 10).

WORLD WAR

In the next few verses the language hardly allows of a limited application to Israel only. The sweep of the passage seems to be as universal as Jeremiah 25.

“Fear, and the pit, and the snare (‘scare, lair and snare’ is a translation suggested by the assonance of the Hebrew words) are upon thee, O inhabitant of the earth (or, if limited to Israel, ‘O dweller in the Land’).” These terrors are now described in greater detail: “And it shall come to pass that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear (as though it were a mighty explosion!) shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare.” There is hardly a government in the world, which has not made elaborate preparations to go underground at the first threat of nuclear war. Yet those who come up out of such a “pit” will have to face the insidious imperceptible “snare” of the radioactive aftermath that is the legacy all these Satanic perversions of human cleverness inevitably entail. “For the windows from on high are opened (as though destruction comes down out of the sky), and”—terrifying result! — “the foundations of the earth do shake.” The Biblical associations of these phrases are impressive. At the time of the Deluge God “opened the windows of heaven” (Genesis 7: 11) and sent destruction on an evil world. And now once again a like retribution is inevitable, only this time by fire. Note the association of these two judgements in Peter’s impassioned warning in 2 Peter 3: 5-7. Also, in a powerful psalm of Messiah, the shaking of the earth is represented as an evident token of God’s anger: “Then the earth shook and trembled … because he was wroth” (Psalm 18: 7).

The horror of the picture intensifies: “The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly. The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage.” The language is marvellously apt to describe the utter destruction and chaos which nuclear war will inevitably bring. “Removed like a cottage” suggests to the mind the idea of a frail shack battered and wrecked by a hurricane. “And it shall fall, and not rise again.” This is to be the final end of all human vanity and self-assertion against God.

“And it shall come to pass that the Lord will punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth.” The words seem to imply the existence of two kinds of armies — those who make war in the sky, and those who fight on the ground.^[26] No wonder the prophets studied their own writings to see what they were all about (1 Peter 1: 11)! “And they shall be gathered together, as prisoners are gathered in the pit, and shall be shut up in the prison, and after many days they shall be visited.” The precise meaning of this outcome of human rebellion is not dear, but the similarity with the symbolic picture of Satan’s imprisonment and ultimate destruction, as given in Revelation 20, is not to be missed (compare also Isaiah 14: 9-11, 15). These Scriptures are surely about the same thing.

THE K1NGDOM

The climax of this first section of the Little Apocalypse is a re-assuring picture of Christ’s kingdom established: “Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the Lord of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously.” This last phrase is surely a reference to the fulfilment of the Covenant of Promise. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, now raised to immortality, will experience the gladness of knowing in person their exalted Seed whose “day” they rejoiced to see (John 8: 56). But especially are these words true regarding David, for to him it was explicitly promised: “thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee (that is, in thy presence).” Yet Isaac and Jacob knew the same wonderful truth. The blessing which the latter received from his father implies this: “And God Almighty give thee the blessing of Abraham, to thee and to thy seed with thee; that thou mayest inherit the land” (Genesis 28:4).

The shaming of sun and moon is susceptible of different interpretations. The view that here the sun stands for the ruling powers and the moon for the ecclesiastical powers is not so apt as the idea that the symbolism has reference to national Israel. In that case, here is another prophecy of the bitter remorse of Jewry when their Messiah is manifested: “They shall look on me whom they have pierced, and shall mourn for him as one mourneth for his only son.”

It is even possible that the words will have a literal basis. The Shekinah Glory associated with the risen Jesus when he appeared to Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus outshone the brightness of the midday sun (Acts 26: 13). The same phenomenon will be known again (Malachi 4: 2; Isaiah 60: 1, 3 and 4 5).

[24] Septuagint Version.

[25] The same is true also in the New Testament regarding the Greek word ‘ge’.

[26] Alternatively, if the phrase “the high ones on high” is interpreted as a symbol, the reference will be to Israel and their encircling enemies.