Hope of Israel Ministries (Ecclesia of YEHOVAH):

Greece: The Iron Empire of Daniel 2!

More than 70 percent of the verses concerning the four world empires, found in the Old Testament book of Daniel, directly pertain to the fourth empire and its breakup in relationship to Palestine. Daniel 7:19 relates that the fourth empire is "different from all the rest." Furthermore, it will "crush and shatter" all previous kingdoms (Daniel 2:40). Futuristic interpreters, who identify Rome as the fourth empire, contend that events depicted under the dominion of the fourth empire will be fulfilled in a future revived Roman Empire and tribulation period. On the contrary, this article will present evidence that contends Greece is properly the fourth empire. Such argument will be based not only on the prior identification of Media as the second empire (see our article, Daniel's Four Kingdoms), but also on tangible evidence that events depicted under the dominion of the fourth empire were actually fulfilled in the history of the Greek Empire, and thus have no future literal significance.

Futurists and the 4th Empire

Futuristic interpreters maintain that Rome is the fourth empire; their notion is based primarily on an erroneous identification of Medo-Persia as the second empire. Futurists understand Greece to be the third empire, which is naturally followed by the Roman Empire. The immediate problem facing this view, and which has already been alluded to above, is that the events depicted under the fourth empire's dominion cannot be linked historically with events taking place within the Roman Empire. John F. Walvoord states:

The interpretation identifying this [fourth empire] as Rome immediately has a major problem in that there is no real correspondence to the Roman Empire historically in the phrase, "and it had ten horns" (Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974. P. 162).

Since YEHOVAH God intends us to interpret prophecy literally, Walvoord understandably reasons that the "only possibility of literal fulfillment of this prophecy" would be that "ten actual kingdoms will exist simultaneously in the future consummation" (ibid., pp. 162, 169).

Walvoord's answer to the dilemma is tribulationism. The events (toes, horns, little horn) which cannot be reconciled under the Roman view are simply projected into the future, thereby escaping the bounds of historical correspondence. According to futurists, the toes and ten horns represent a ten-nation revived Roman Empire. The little horn is a future antichrist that will gain control of this confederacy just prior to the tribulation period. The result of this interpretation is constant speculation among modern-day prophecy writers as to the identity of the ten-nation confederacy, and Antichrist, and timing of the tribulation period.

The futuristic view also faces a second major difficulty. The text states clearly that the little horn came up among the ten horns that were on the head of the beast (Daniel 7:20). The ten horns, and the little horn, rose up BEFORE the fourth kingdom was destroyed. How, then, is it possible for the little horn to be identified as a future antichrist when the Roman Empire came to an end in the fifth century A.D.? The solution offered by futuristic interpreters stretches the imagination and exposes the speculative basis of their theory. Walvoord suggests a way out of the dilemma:

Probably the best solution to the problem is the familiar teaching that Daniel's prophecy actually passes over the present age, the period between the first and second coming of Christ or, more specifically, the period between Pentecost and the rapture of the church (ibid., p.72).

According to this interpretation, the book of Daniel bypasses 2,000 years of Christianity: Daniel wrote concerning Jewish history from the time of Nebuchadnezzar (605 B.C.) to the first appearance of the Messiah (31 A.D.). Since Daniel was not aware of the New Testament church age, his prophecies leap over the Christian era and will resume following the "rapture" of the church. At that time, Daniel's prophecies will be fulfilled as YEHOVAH God again deals with the Jews as a nation during the seven-year tribulation period.

Since Daniel lived and wrote about these future events no later than 500 years before the Messiah, it is certainly reasonable to conclude that he was not aware of the church age. But the notion that the church age constitutes a "gap" or "parenthesis" in history based on such lack of knowledge is the brainchild of interpreters who insist on identifying Rome as the fourth empire. The "gap" theory should therefore be viewed as a questionable consequence of this identification, not as a confirmation that nonconforming events await fulfillment in a future time.

The 4th Empire in Daniel 2

"As you saw the feet and toes partly of potter's clay and partly of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom; but some of the strength of iron shall be in it, as you saw the iron mixed with the clay" [Daniel 2:41].

The fourth kingdom is represented by legs of iron in the metallic statue. The iron kingdom is divided into feet of iron and clay representing a "divided kingdom." The type of "duality" which futurists attempt to force on the "chest and arms" is illustrated here. Daniel attaches specific interpretive value to the feet and toes as symbols of a divided kingdom composed "partly of potter's clay and partly of iron." The iron apparently symbolizes the strengths of the divided kingdom, while the clay symbolizes its weaknesses.

Undoubtedly, Daniel has in his prophetic mind the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires, two of the four kingdoms that arose from the division of Alexander's Greek Empire. This point is easily demonstrated by noting the correspondence that exists between Daniel 2:41 and the vision in Daniel 11, in which Daniel immediately singles out the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires after the breakup of Alexander's dominion (verses 5, 6). Likewise, in Daniel 2 the author readily limits himself to these two kingdoms. H. H. Rowley explains:

The author was primarily interested in the Jewish people, and he therefore ignored those parts of the Greek empire which had no relation to Palestinian affairs, especially since the human form of the image, by the natural duality of its legs, helped to impose this limitation (Darius the Mede and the Four World Empires in the Book of Daniel. Cardiff: University of Wales Press Board, 1959. P. 96).

Rowley also points out that in Daniel 8, once the ram's great horn is broken, Daniel moves directly to the persecuting "little horn," thereby "ignor[ing] all that does not concern his own people" (ibid.)

Daniel's interest revolves around Palestine and the Jewish people. Following the breakup of Alexander's Empire in 312 B.C., Daniel's attention turned to the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires which vied for control of Palestine. The various battles between the two rival kingdoms are described in Daniel 11:5-30.

Marriage Alliances Between the Seleucids and Ptolemies

"As you saw the iron mixed with clay, so will they mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay" [Daniel 2:43].

Not only were the toes of the statue made of "part iron and part clay," but they also consisted of "iron mixed with clay." Daniel explains that attempts were made to unify the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires through "marriage," but these efforts failed because "iron does not mix with clay." While no further identification of these marriages is provided here, in the corresponding vision of Daniel 11, two marriage alliances are specifically recollected.

"After some years they shall make an alliance, and the daughter of the king of the south shall come to the king of the north to ratify the agreement. But she shall not retain her power, and his offspring shall not endure. She shall be given up, she and her attendants and her child and the one who supported her" [Daniel 11:6].

The king of the south in the above-mentioned verse, Ptolemy Philadelphus, made peace with the king of the north, Antiochus Theos, and sealed the agreement by giving his daughter, Berenice, in marriage to Antiochus in 247 B.C. Following Ptolemy's death, Antiochus put Berenice away and took back his first wife, Laodice. Laodice then had Antiochus and Berenice murdered, creating more tension between the Ptolemies and Seleucids.

"He shall set his mind to come with the strength of his whole kingdom, and he shall bring terms of peace and perform them. In order to destroy the kingdom, he shall give him a woman in marriage; but it shall not succeed or be to his advantage" [Daniel 11:17].

In 198 B.C. Antiochus the Great gave his daughter, Cleopatra, in marriage to Ptolemy Epiphanes as part of another peace treaty between the two warring kingdoms. Antiochus' ulterior motive was to gain access to the Ptolemaic throne through his daughter's influence on her husband. Cleopatra, however, did not behave as Antiochus had hoped she would; instead of betraying Ptolemy, she remained faithful to him, foiling her father's designs. Thus, another intermarriage failed.

Summary of the 4th Empire in Daniel 2

There is clear and complete confirmation between Daniel 2 and Daniel 11 regarding the fourth empire, which provides a solid foundation for identifying the fourth empire as Greece. The duality of the statue's feet is easily seen as the Seleucid and Ptolemaic empires to which Daniel limited himself in Daniel 11. Further correspondence is evidenced by the mixture of iron and clay in the toes. Marriage alliances between the two rival kingdoms are indicated and confirmed in Daniel 11. A reasonable conclusion, therefore, is that the fourth empire of Daniel 2 is not Rome, but Greece as represented by Alexander the Great and his successors. The vision in Daniel 2 has been literally fulfilled in history, thereby rendering it a moot point that a future revived Roman Empire is symbolized by the statue's toes.

The 4th Beast Is Greece

Since interpreters agree that the same four kingdoms are symbolized in Daniel 7, the fourth beast may also be identified with the Greek Empire. Confirmation can be had by identifying the beast's ten horns and the "little horn" that came up among them. In conjunction with the toes of the statue, futurists identify the ten horns as a future revived Roman Empire, and the little horn as an end-time Antichrist. However, if Daniel intended the "little horn" to be identified as Antiochus Epiphanes, and the ten horns as Seleucid kings, then it will be confirmed that the fourth kingdom of Daniel 7 is also Greece.

Antiochus, the "Little Horn"

"I was considering the horns, when another horn appeared, a little one coming up among them; to make room for it, three of the earlier horns were plucked up by the roots. There were eyes like human eyes in this horn, and a mouth speaking arrogantly" [Daniel 7:8].

" ... the horn that had eyes and a mouth that spoke arrogantly, and that seemed greater than the others. As I looked, this horn made war with the holy ones and was prevailing over them, until the Ancient One came; then judgment was given for the holy ones of the Most High, and the time arrived when the holy ones gained possession of the kingdom" [Daniel 7:20-22].

"'This one shall be different from the former ones, and shall put down three kings. He shall speak words against the Most High, shall wear out the holy ones of the Most High, and shall attempt to change the sacred seasons and the law; and they shall be given into his power for a time, two times, and half a time'" [Daniel 7:24b, 25].

Daniel's beastly vision climaxes with the author's focus on the "little horn," who "made war with the holy ones." Attributes of the little horn are its "human eyes" and a "mouth speaking arrogantly," indicating that it represents a human being. In Daniel 7:24, confirmation of the horn's mortality is found: The ten horns are determined to be "ten kings." The little horn is an eleventh king which "shall arise after them."

The characteristics and actions ascribed to the little horn in Daniel 7 may be compared to the traits attributed to Antiochus Epiphanes in Daniel 8; 11:2-35. Such comparison makes clear that the evil Antiochus, not a future Antichrist, is again in view. The table below illustrates the correspondence --

The energetic "little horn" in Daniel 7 that speaks words against the Most High, changes religious worship and laws, and wears out the holy ones (verse 25), is the same "little horn" that in Daniel 8 acts arrogantly against YEHOVAH God, takes away the daily sacrifice (verse 11), and destroys the holy ones (verse 24). Both "little horns" arise from the latter stages of the Greek Empire, and they each blaspheme YEHOVAH, persecute the Jews, and outlaw Judaism. Thus it is evident that the "little horn" of Daniel 7 is not a future antichrist, but Antiochus, the "madman" whose actions were clearly prophesied by Daniel.

Time Period Corresponds with Persecution of Antiochus

'" ... and they shall be given into his power for a time, two times, and half a time'" [Daniel 7:25].

The duration of the little horn's persecution is "a time, two times, and half a time." The word "time" here is generally taken to mean "year," and the entire phrase understood by most interpreters (futurists included) to represent roughly three and a half years. Futurists maintain that this phrase should be interpreted as the last half of the seven-year tribulation period.

However, the period of persecution occurs during the reign of the little horn, which is clearly Antiochus. Further, this three-and-a-half-year period corresponds closely to the 1,150 days (three years and two months) mentioned in Daniel 8. Both reflect the historical period of Jewish persecution under Antiochus from 167 B.C. to 164 B.C.

The fact that three and a half years is four months longer than 1,150 days is an apparent, but insignificant, discrepancy. Daniel may or may not have intended the two time periods to correspond exactly. The phrase "time, two times, and half a time" may be understood as an approximation of the more specific 1,150-day interval. Elsewhere Daniel uses both approximate (cf. 9:27; 12:7) and specific (cf. 12:11, 12) figures regarding the same time frame.

Another possibility is that in Daniel 7 the author was referring to the general period of persecution, during which time "they shall be given into his power" (verse 25). The lesser period of 1,150 days then deals specifically with the cessation of the daily sacrifice and Temple desecration.

In any event, it is sufficient to recognize the amazing correspondence that exists between the two time periods. Both deal with Jewish persecution under the tyrannous Antiochus, and correspond historically with the time of desecration of the Temple. This evidence provides ample support for identifying the three-and-a-half-year period in Daniel 7 with events prophesied by Daniel.

Horns Represent Seleucid Kings

" ... It was different from all the beasts that preceded it, and it had ten horns" [Daniel 7:7].

'''As for the ten horns, out of this kingdom ten kings shall arise, and another shall arise after them. This one shall be different from the former ones, and shall put down three kings'" [Daniel 7:241.

The fourth beast has "ten horns" on its head, which the Bible identifies as "ten kings." Futurists' contention is that these ten kings represent a future revived Roman Empire. How can this be, however, since the ten kings precede Antiochus, since Antiochus "shall arise after them"? The ten kings are identified as one group; therefore, the general conclusion can be reached that, all together, they provide a recognizable bridge of royalty between the great "iron" empire of Alexander the Great (334-312 B.C.) and Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 B.C.).

Scholars differ in their reckoning of the ten kings. Some identify them exclusively with Seleucid kings, while others proffer various combinations of Seleucid and Ptolemaic kings. Most interpreters identify seven of the horns as the first seven Seleucid kings following the breakup of Alexander's empire: (1) Seleucus I Nicator, 312-281 B.C. (founder of the Seleucid Dynasty); (2) Antiochus I Soter, 281-261 B.C.; (3) Antiochus II Theos, 261-246 B.C.; (4) Seleucus II Callinicus, 246-226 B.C.; (5) Seleucus III Ceraunus, 226-223 B.C.; (6) Antiochus III the Great, 223-187 B.C.; and (7) Seleucus IV Philopator, 187-175 B.C.

The remaining three kings are represented by the three horns that were "plucked up by the roots" in order to "make room" for the "little horn" that "came up" among the ten (Daniel 7:8). Considering that the three were "plucked up by the roots," the likely candidates for identification with the three horns are three aspirants who would have had the opportunity to become king of the Seleucid Empire were it not for the devious acts of Antiochus. The three would-be kings are (1) Heliodorus, a usurper who poisoned Seleucus Philopator in an attempt to secure the throne; (2) Demetrius, son of Seleucus, the rightful heir after his father's death; and (3) Ptolemy VI Philometor, king of Egypt and nephew of Antiochus who desired to gain the Seleucid throne.

The fact that Antiochus gained the Seleucid throne by deceit is confirmed in Daniel 11:21, where the author states that "royal majesty had not been conferred" on him. Furthermore, "he shall come in without warning and obtain the kingdom through intrigue." This statement clearly indicates that Antiochus secured power suddenly and abruptly. It is noteworthy too that Daniel refers to the division of Alexander's dominion as being "uprooted" (cf. 11:4). Just as the empire of Alexander did not go to his son and heir, the Seleucid Empire likewise did not go to Demetrius, the rightful heir of Seleucus Philopator; both were "uprooted."

The "Son of Man"

"I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before Him. Then to him [the one like the Son of Man] was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which will not pass away, and his kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed" (Daniel 7:13-14 NKJV).

Futuristic interpreters hold that the "one like the Son of man" is none other than Yeshua the Messiah, and that the passage depicts the Messiah's second appearance in the future. This identification is evidently based primarily on New Testament references to Yeshua as "the Son of man." While the "one like the Son of Man" is indeed the Messiah, these verses DO NOT depict the second appearance but the arrival of the Messiah IN HEAVEN after his resurrection in 31 A.D.! Notice, in Matthew, that the Messiah refers to himself as the Son of man -- and also links himself to what is depicted in Daniel 7:13-14 --

"Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory" (Matthew 24:30, NKJV).

"But Jesus kept silent. And the high priest answered and said to him, 'I adjure you by the living God that you tell us if you are the Christ [anointed one], the SON OF GOD.' Jesus said to him, ' IT IS AS YOU SAID. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter [after his resurrection] you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power [YEHOVAH God], and coming on the clouds of heaven' " (Matthew 24:63-64, NKJV).

Daniel 7:13-14 is, therefore, a KEY event that determines the chronology of Daniel 7. Since the Messiah was crucified in 31 A.D., the arrival of the Messiah in heaven to sit at the right hand of the Ancient of Days (YEHOVAH God) occurred shortly after his resurrection in the same year. As a result, the rising up of the four beasts (kingdoms) occurred prior to 31 A.D.! The four kingdom, therefore, could NOT have been Rome.

The context of Daniel is in complete agreement with the interpretation known as the Greek view (Babylon, Media, Persia and Greece). The visions contained in Daniel 2; 7 correspond completely with the visions in Daniel 8; 11:2-35. Each vision covers the same era of history and culminates in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. Daniel's purpose was to illustrate that YEHOVAH God's plan for the rise and fall of pagan nations would come to fruition PRIOR to the Messiah's resurrection and arrival in heaven in 31 A.D. -- many years into his future.

A ten-nation revival of the Roman Empire and a FUTURE antichrist that will gain control of this confederacy just prior to the return of the Messiah and YEHOVAH God is nothing more than a FIGMENT of the futurist interpreter's imagination and has absolutely NO BASIS in the Holy Scriptures of YEHOVAH God!