I am certain the 4th kingdom has been biblically identified and I am convinced the 4th kingdom is a middle eastern country. But to fill the voids in history leading up to it, I too used old schools of thought to make it fit. I listened to the commentators of days gone by, I once believed the third kingdom to be Alexander's Greek Empire and like them, I believed it was the Greek kingdom which would bear rule over all the earth. Only lately, have I asked the questions where in God's word does it say Alexander the Great shall bear rule over the earth? Where is it written the Greek Empire will be the 3rd kingdom in Nebuchad-nezzar's dream? Some say Rome is the fourth kingdom because it followed the Greek. It is according to any high school history book true, but is it biblical?
"BEHOLD A GREAT IMAGE"
The Book of Daniel I believe gives us one of the most complete pictures of the Anti-Christ kingdom. In the beginning chapters we read King Nebuchad-nezzar dreamed dreams where with his spirit was troubled and he couldn't sleep. So troubled was the king he commanded his Magicians, Astrologers, Sorcerers, and Chaldeans to reveal the secret of the thing that had gone from him. But none of these men could tell the king what he had dreamed nor the interpretation of it. Unable to give him what he demanded they were to be put to death.
As the kings decree became known throughout the land, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, Azariah, and his companions desired to the mercies of the God of heaven concerning the secret. For God has the power to reveal it and He did so in a night vision (Daniel 2:19-23) note only afterwards did Daniel dare approach the king with the answer.
Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible. This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. Daniel 2:31-35
I think it imperative we must understand that following every dream or vision in the Book of Daniel is an interpretation originating from none other than the God of Heaven Himself. The common school of thought in the commentaries I've read describes a portion verses 31-35 as Greek and Roman. But after searching the scriptures to see if these things are so I find a grievous problem. What is written in those verses is only a description of that thing which had gone from king Nebuchad-nezzar, the dream itself! Absolutely nothing has been left to our imagination or reason! Daniel and his companions have already inquired of God concerning both of king Nebuchad-nezzer’s questions namely what was it he had dreamed AND the interpretation thereof.
This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king. Daniel 2:36 Need you add more?
"THOU ART THIS HEAD OF GOLD"
Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold. And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Daniel 2:37 thru 44
Based upon God's interpretation contained above (verses 37 thru 44). If we must name the first kingdom it is Babylon as it is said Nebuchad-nezzar reigned as king. The next two kingdoms seem to have very little information about them, or do they?
From what information I can gather about the second kingdom, it was said to be inferior to the first. One would think of Belshazzar as he is the second "king of Babylon" written of in the Book of Daniel. There is no evidence in this or other books of the bible to suggest that he was ever held in as high regard as his predecessor. He had what appeared to be a much less stately manner about him as we read of the party he threw for his pleasure using the temple instruments. Belshazzar also had not a humble heart (Daniel 5:22-23). Which leads me to believe that it was not the size of his kingdom's border that mattered rather it was because of his heart and behavior he was considered inferior to his father king Nebuchad-nezzar.
Now we come to the third kingdom. I find this very interesting, comparing it to other scripture, it appears to be identical to king Nebuchad-nezzar's in that it too will bear rule over all the earth. Using scripture as the sole commentator and interpreter, there is, to the best of my knowledge, only one other king ever written of in the bible to be specifically granted such power and title. This was not granted by men, as some do, giving it to Alexander the Great and his Grecian Empire nor even to Titus and Vespasian. No-no! This authority was granted in writing by the God of Heaven Himself. After I read Ezra 1:1-2, it seems the identity of the third kingdom is that of Cyrus king of Persia, this same Cyrus also known as the "king of Babylon" (Ezra 5:13). It is king Cyrus to whom God quite clearly gave this authority to not Alexander.
Now we have the names of three kings; one Chaldean specifically granted rule over all the kingdoms of earth, another given the same kingdom though he is considered inferior. Then one Persian whom God granted rule over all the kingdoms of earth. All three of these men are known scripturally in their own time as "king of geographical Babylon". Reading Daniel 11:2, I find four more, though unnamed, kings will rise up from Persia, and if my math is correct this will so far total seven kings written in the Book of Daniel. Consider then that if the first three kings were known as kings of Babylon wouldn't it be acceptable to consider the next four would hold the same title or somehow be associated with her too? Note the four kings rise up from Persia not Rome or Greece and in Revelation 17 we see there is diffenetly a relationship seen between the city of Babylon and seven kings.
And here (is) the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings five are fallen, and one is, (and) the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was , and is not, even he is the eight, and is of the seven, and go into perdition. Revelation 17:9 -11.
Is this enough scriptural support and wisdom to finally understand where the last king of Babylon will reign? I contend he, the eighth king in Revelation 17:10 is of the seven. Like the seven kings before him this "vile king" will not reign in Washington D.C., Ankara, Rome or Moscow. No, he may actually be the last king of physical Babylon before her final and devastating destruction. However that would then lead one to believe the great city must be rebuilt. Maybe maybe not but one can look too at the history of the United States and its allies. Since the debacle after WWI in the aftermath of war they have had a tendency to rebuild defeated nations. There are even some news articles which may indicate to some extent it will happen, time will tell, God's will be done.
In Daniel chapter 8. We are told of something happening "at the appointed time the end shall be" which I think begins with a battle between the Madi and Persian kings and that of the king of Javan. We read here the speed and ferocity with which Javan comes against and prevails against these middle eastern kings who stirred up all against his realm. After the horn of Javan is broken we see four notable horns appear. Then when the "time of the transgressors have come full" a little horn rises up.
In Daniel chapter 11 we are told it is the seventh king to rise up from Persia who will stir up all against the realm of Javan. And it appears to be speaking of the same battle described in chapter 8. However, in chapter 11 what we now have in greater detail is the time between the aftermath of that battle and the little horn. A period of time I think I could safely refer to as 'the time of the transgressors'. We see the rise, conflicts, and fall of the fourth kingdom culminating in the death of the vile king. I find it interesting too that unlike the demise of Gog, this "vile king" seems to just fizzle out. It could be we are told that Babylon is to punished and that it may be Gog who does this. After which he falls upon the mountains of Israel. Which I believe happens AFTER the chosen have been called out of Babylon and other nations and they go to Zion.
Now when we read Revelation 17:10, which is thought to have given to John around 81 and 90 A.D. The sixth king the 'one is' was known as a Parthian and if I am not mistaken is Persian by another name. Though Im not sure what Parthian king in particular was reigning during this 9 year time frame. It most certainly rules out all together Rome and or Trajan as neither had any direct physical influence on Babylon until much later. Reading on we are then told the seventh king to rise up in Persia had not come yet. When he does we can know Alexander has long since been dead and buried just as Rome and Trajan will have been, so I think the focus remains again on Persian, particularly the great city Babylon.
Considering todays events in that region of the world is it possible we are now living at the appointed time of the end? Are we witnessing the realm of Javan in action in the middle east? Forces from the United States, Poland, Germany, Italy, Greece, France, Britain and other lands where the tribes of Javan are thought to have migrated (see Genesis 10 and the Table of Nations). Javan now after a battle having a direct influence in that region making it part of his kingdom by standing up rulers friendly to him. Later when Javan's horn is broken will we see four notable kings and the 4th kingdom rise and eventually culminating in the little horn?
Finally we come to the fourth kingdom, This rises in the aftermath of Javan's horn being broken. Like the others it has no name given to it either but by searching the scriptures we can find those details out. But here our attention should be drawn to the incredibly detailed description. Revealing possibly a number of kings represented by the number of toes and most certainly its nature and the time of its existence.
Leaning solely on my God's interpretation, I find it is made of iron. Iron here simply stated represents strength, as this kingdom will be able to 'break into pieces and subdue all things and bruise'. In verse 41 we read the feet and toes are made of part potters clay and part iron. This interpreted in verse 42-43 tells us the 4th kingdom will not only have the strength of iron but it will also be divided. Now most romanist commentators have expressed the word 'divided' to mean an arithmetical division such as when the late Roman empire was divided out of necessity for survival around 365 A.D. into two, an eastern and western region each with it's own capital but still a Roman empire. Or as some even say the feet represent a fifth kingdom we must remind them God specifically numbered them one thru four.
But again, when I compare scripture with scripture I find when God speaks of a divided kingdom it appears to mean (1) to disunite in opinion or interest; to make discordant. He gives several examples of a 'divided' kingdom and it's end; If a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom can not stand, Mark 3:2; Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand, Matthew 12:25; Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth, Luke 11:15.b. As we read further we see this fourth kingdom falling to its demise, when the stone cut without hands strikes it.
((1) Webster's 1828 Dictionary)
And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. This I have trouble with and I'm not certain what it means it is obviously describing the people of the fourth kingdom. Possibly meaning they dwell with us, they may even be your neighbor but will keep themselves separate from the rest of us by reason of faith, business or politics. But honestly, that sounds too much like the "red menace" and McCarthyism. Another idea, I favor greatly, is they give in marriage causing their seed to mingle between the families of different tribes or nations within the fourth kingdom. Unfortunately their nature still prevents them from being united or having love for one another. This at least re-enforces the idea and interpretation of a divided, disunited and discordant 4th kingdom or house. And it seems in keeping with those problems only a house divided such as the 4th kingdom will have (Daniel 11:6-7).
Regarding the time of it's existence I think is obvious and straight forward when the fourth kingdom will be in existence, when God returns to establish His kingdom "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom,..." .
You may have questions I hope to have answers.
Peace
"BEHOLD A GREAT IMAGE"
The Book of Daniel I believe gives us one of the most complete pictures of the Anti-Christ kingdom. In the beginning chapters we read King Nebuchad-nezzar dreamed dreams where with his spirit was troubled and he couldn't sleep. So troubled was the king he commanded his Magicians, Astrologers, Sorcerers, and Chaldeans to reveal the secret of the thing that had gone from him. But none of these men could tell the king what he had dreamed nor the interpretation of it. Unable to give him what he demanded they were to be put to death.
As the kings decree became known throughout the land, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, Azariah, and his companions desired to the mercies of the God of heaven concerning the secret. For God has the power to reveal it and He did so in a night vision (Daniel 2:19-23) note only afterwards did Daniel dare approach the king with the answer.
Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible. This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. Daniel 2:31-35
I think it imperative we must understand that following every dream or vision in the Book of Daniel is an interpretation originating from none other than the God of Heaven Himself. The common school of thought in the commentaries I've read describes a portion verses 31-35 as Greek and Roman. But after searching the scriptures to see if these things are so I find a grievous problem. What is written in those verses is only a description of that thing which had gone from king Nebuchad-nezzar, the dream itself! Absolutely nothing has been left to our imagination or reason! Daniel and his companions have already inquired of God concerning both of king Nebuchad-nezzer’s questions namely what was it he had dreamed AND the interpretation thereof.
This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king. Daniel 2:36 Need you add more?
"THOU ART THIS HEAD OF GOLD"
Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold. And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Daniel 2:37 thru 44
Based upon God's interpretation contained above (verses 37 thru 44). If we must name the first kingdom it is Babylon as it is said Nebuchad-nezzar reigned as king. The next two kingdoms seem to have very little information about them, or do they?
From what information I can gather about the second kingdom, it was said to be inferior to the first. One would think of Belshazzar as he is the second "king of Babylon" written of in the Book of Daniel. There is no evidence in this or other books of the bible to suggest that he was ever held in as high regard as his predecessor. He had what appeared to be a much less stately manner about him as we read of the party he threw for his pleasure using the temple instruments. Belshazzar also had not a humble heart (Daniel 5:22-23). Which leads me to believe that it was not the size of his kingdom's border that mattered rather it was because of his heart and behavior he was considered inferior to his father king Nebuchad-nezzar.
Now we come to the third kingdom. I find this very interesting, comparing it to other scripture, it appears to be identical to king Nebuchad-nezzar's in that it too will bear rule over all the earth. Using scripture as the sole commentator and interpreter, there is, to the best of my knowledge, only one other king ever written of in the bible to be specifically granted such power and title. This was not granted by men, as some do, giving it to Alexander the Great and his Grecian Empire nor even to Titus and Vespasian. No-no! This authority was granted in writing by the God of Heaven Himself. After I read Ezra 1:1-2, it seems the identity of the third kingdom is that of Cyrus king of Persia, this same Cyrus also known as the "king of Babylon" (Ezra 5:13). It is king Cyrus to whom God quite clearly gave this authority to not Alexander.
Now we have the names of three kings; one Chaldean specifically granted rule over all the kingdoms of earth, another given the same kingdom though he is considered inferior. Then one Persian whom God granted rule over all the kingdoms of earth. All three of these men are known scripturally in their own time as "king of geographical Babylon". Reading Daniel 11:2, I find four more, though unnamed, kings will rise up from Persia, and if my math is correct this will so far total seven kings written in the Book of Daniel. Consider then that if the first three kings were known as kings of Babylon wouldn't it be acceptable to consider the next four would hold the same title or somehow be associated with her too? Note the four kings rise up from Persia not Rome or Greece and in Revelation 17 we see there is diffenetly a relationship seen between the city of Babylon and seven kings.
And here (is) the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings five are fallen, and one is, (and) the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was , and is not, even he is the eight, and is of the seven, and go into perdition. Revelation 17:9 -11.
Is this enough scriptural support and wisdom to finally understand where the last king of Babylon will reign? I contend he, the eighth king in Revelation 17:10 is of the seven. Like the seven kings before him this "vile king" will not reign in Washington D.C., Ankara, Rome or Moscow. No, he may actually be the last king of physical Babylon before her final and devastating destruction. However that would then lead one to believe the great city must be rebuilt. Maybe maybe not but one can look too at the history of the United States and its allies. Since the debacle after WWI in the aftermath of war they have had a tendency to rebuild defeated nations. There are even some news articles which may indicate to some extent it will happen, time will tell, God's will be done.
In Daniel chapter 8. We are told of something happening "at the appointed time the end shall be" which I think begins with a battle between the Madi and Persian kings and that of the king of Javan. We read here the speed and ferocity with which Javan comes against and prevails against these middle eastern kings who stirred up all against his realm. After the horn of Javan is broken we see four notable horns appear. Then when the "time of the transgressors have come full" a little horn rises up.
In Daniel chapter 11 we are told it is the seventh king to rise up from Persia who will stir up all against the realm of Javan. And it appears to be speaking of the same battle described in chapter 8. However, in chapter 11 what we now have in greater detail is the time between the aftermath of that battle and the little horn. A period of time I think I could safely refer to as 'the time of the transgressors'. We see the rise, conflicts, and fall of the fourth kingdom culminating in the death of the vile king. I find it interesting too that unlike the demise of Gog, this "vile king" seems to just fizzle out. It could be we are told that Babylon is to punished and that it may be Gog who does this. After which he falls upon the mountains of Israel. Which I believe happens AFTER the chosen have been called out of Babylon and other nations and they go to Zion.
Now when we read Revelation 17:10, which is thought to have given to John around 81 and 90 A.D. The sixth king the 'one is' was known as a Parthian and if I am not mistaken is Persian by another name. Though Im not sure what Parthian king in particular was reigning during this 9 year time frame. It most certainly rules out all together Rome and or Trajan as neither had any direct physical influence on Babylon until much later. Reading on we are then told the seventh king to rise up in Persia had not come yet. When he does we can know Alexander has long since been dead and buried just as Rome and Trajan will have been, so I think the focus remains again on Persian, particularly the great city Babylon.
Considering todays events in that region of the world is it possible we are now living at the appointed time of the end? Are we witnessing the realm of Javan in action in the middle east? Forces from the United States, Poland, Germany, Italy, Greece, France, Britain and other lands where the tribes of Javan are thought to have migrated (see Genesis 10 and the Table of Nations). Javan now after a battle having a direct influence in that region making it part of his kingdom by standing up rulers friendly to him. Later when Javan's horn is broken will we see four notable kings and the 4th kingdom rise and eventually culminating in the little horn?
Finally we come to the fourth kingdom, This rises in the aftermath of Javan's horn being broken. Like the others it has no name given to it either but by searching the scriptures we can find those details out. But here our attention should be drawn to the incredibly detailed description. Revealing possibly a number of kings represented by the number of toes and most certainly its nature and the time of its existence.
Leaning solely on my God's interpretation, I find it is made of iron. Iron here simply stated represents strength, as this kingdom will be able to 'break into pieces and subdue all things and bruise'. In verse 41 we read the feet and toes are made of part potters clay and part iron. This interpreted in verse 42-43 tells us the 4th kingdom will not only have the strength of iron but it will also be divided. Now most romanist commentators have expressed the word 'divided' to mean an arithmetical division such as when the late Roman empire was divided out of necessity for survival around 365 A.D. into two, an eastern and western region each with it's own capital but still a Roman empire. Or as some even say the feet represent a fifth kingdom we must remind them God specifically numbered them one thru four.
But again, when I compare scripture with scripture I find when God speaks of a divided kingdom it appears to mean (1) to disunite in opinion or interest; to make discordant. He gives several examples of a 'divided' kingdom and it's end; If a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom can not stand, Mark 3:2; Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand, Matthew 12:25; Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth, Luke 11:15.b. As we read further we see this fourth kingdom falling to its demise, when the stone cut without hands strikes it.
((1) Webster's 1828 Dictionary)
And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay. This I have trouble with and I'm not certain what it means it is obviously describing the people of the fourth kingdom. Possibly meaning they dwell with us, they may even be your neighbor but will keep themselves separate from the rest of us by reason of faith, business or politics. But honestly, that sounds too much like the "red menace" and McCarthyism. Another idea, I favor greatly, is they give in marriage causing their seed to mingle between the families of different tribes or nations within the fourth kingdom. Unfortunately their nature still prevents them from being united or having love for one another. This at least re-enforces the idea and interpretation of a divided, disunited and discordant 4th kingdom or house. And it seems in keeping with those problems only a house divided such as the 4th kingdom will have (Daniel 11:6-7).
Regarding the time of it's existence I think is obvious and straight forward when the fourth kingdom will be in existence, when God returns to establish His kingdom "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom,..." .
You may have questions I hope to have answers.
Peace
If you do a little studying you shall find that Belshazzar was never the actual king of Babylon, but only second in rank as a co-regent with his immediate father. This is why he could only make Daniel 'the third ruler in the kingdom'.
