Follow
Last week, we started a discussion on the Four Empires depicted in the visions of Daniel chapters 2 and 7—Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome. As we demonstrated with citations from Early Church Fathers, a Roman Catholic apologist and a Protestant commentary, the judgment scene in Daniel 7 is typically collapsed into a single event in which the Fourth Beast (Rome) and the Little Horn (the Antichrist) are destroyed together. It is typical for the judgment scene in Daniel 2—the Stone striking the statue of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream—to be depicted in the same way: as a single act of judgment against the series of empires. But in both chapters, the text and the context convey an extended judgment, and Daniel 7 explicitly states that after the initial act of judgment against the body of the Fourth Beast, the lives of the preceding empires are granted a continuance of sorts.
If Daniel 7 says the lives of the three preceding empires are allowed to go on after the destruction of the body of the Fourth Beast (Daniel 7:12), and Daniel 2 says that the preceding empires are so utterly destroyed “that no place was found for them” at the end of the dream (Daniel 2: 35), then it is clear that Daniel has more than one single swift act of judgment in mind. We believe, therefore, that there are two “judicial movements” depicted in each vision, and they emerge in the harmony of the two chapters. Once those two judicial movements are identified, the Antichrist’s kingdom comes to the fore, showing that Roman Catholicism is the Fifth Empire of Daniel’s vision, emerging from the ruins of the first judicial movement against the Roman empire, only to be finally destroyed in the second judicial movement against Antichrist and his followers.
This week we will discuss the two judicial movements in each chapter, and then identify from the Scriptures how it is that the preceding Three empires are allowed to live on after the destruction of the Body of the Fourth Beast in the first judicial movement.
Two Judicial Movements in Daniel 2
In Daniel 2, we notice that in the initial description of the statue, no Toes are mentioned. Daniel describes the Statue with legs of iron, and feet “part of iron and part of clay” (Daniel 2:33), and then the Stone strikes the image “upon his feet … and brake them to pieces” (Daniel 2:34). It is only after the impact of the Stone that the statue is depicted with Toes.
The fact that the Feet and Toes are then described as part Iron and part Clay is because the kingdom is partly strong and partly divided (Daniel 2:41), referring to the constant struggle to maintain the political unity of the empire, for “they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men” (Daniel 2:43). As The Year of Four Emperors (69 A.D.) and The Crisis of the Third Century make plain, even when Rome was still “united” during the period depicted by the Feet, it was still rife with internal political divisions. As the Iron and Clay of the Feet prefigured, Rome was united externally in one sense, but divided internally in another—a single empire that no longer retained the internal strength of its Iron Legs, but was not yet broken to pieces.
But the fact that the Statue has Toes at all is because the last kingdom shall be “partly broken”:
“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.” (Daniel 2:42)
Daniel does not single out the Toes for interpretation until after the feet were broken, and the last kingdom was broken into its final fragmented configuration by the first judicial movement of the Stone. What Nebuchadnezzar had seen was a continuous chronology, and the Stone was part of that chronology, and therefore the Statue does not receive its Toes until the Stone strikes the Feet to form them. Daniel’s imagery is quite consistent—the Iron and Clay Feet signify internal divisions of an otherwise uniform empire, and Iron and Clay Toes signify a fragmentation of that Empire when it is broken into smaller pieces. The feet were already weak because they had mixed “with the seed of men,” but they were not fragmented into Toes until the impact of the Stone.
The purpose of the initial strike, therefore, was to shatter the Fourth empire into its final configuration—that is, to form the Toes themselves—but the initial strike does not completely destroy the Iron and Clay, the Bronze, Silver and Gold kingdoms. That would come later.
After the first judicial movement, all the kingdoms together, including the Iron and the Clay, are broken to pieces and ground to dust, and disappear entirely:
“Then (ed-ah’-yin) 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.” (Daniel 2:35)
That is the second judicial movement. The word we have highlighted, “ed-ah’-yin,” means then, “thereupon or afterward,” and serves to separate two events in succession, as it did in Daniel 7:1,
“Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then (ed-ah’-yin) he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters.”
First one thing. Then another. In Daniel 2:34, Daniel had seen one judicial movement, and then in Daniel 2:35 he had seen another. As we move into Daniel 7, the separation between the two judicial movements becomes even clearer.
Two Judicial Movements in Daniel 7
In chapter 7, as in chapter 2, the initial judgement is not upon the preceding empires—the Lion, the Bear and the Leopard. We know this because Daniel is so informed of it. After the Fourth Beast’s Body is committed to the flames, the other Beasts are allowed to live on, though Daniel does not explain how or why:
“As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.” (Daniel 7:12)
It is not the purpose of the first judicial movement to take away the dominion of the rest of the beasts—their dominion had already been taken away during the preceding successions of the empires. Nor is it the purpose of the first judicial movement to destroy them, for after it they are allowed to live on. Apparently, the first judgment is initially executed only upon the Fourth Beast’s Body—which is to say, against the unfragmented Roman empire—just as it was in chapter 2. In both visions, the preceding empires are unaffected by the first judicial movement.
Chronologically, we place this initial movement in chapter 7 at the same point that Nebuchadnezzar’s dream placed the impact of the Stone—during the descending but yet unfragmented Roman Empire. The target, after all, is the Body of the Fourth Beast, not its Horns. In chapter 2, although the entire sequence was before his eyes at once, Daniel nevertheless placed the impact of the Stone chronologically after the Legs but before the Toes. He does the same in chapter 7 by depicting a judgment that is chronologically after the rise of the Roman Empire, but which strikes at the Body only, and not the Horns of the Fourth Beast. The Horns, too, are allowed to live on. As we shall see, in Chapter 7 Daniel conveys to us the transition from the Fourth to the Fifth Empire, as the Roman Empire is beaten into acquiescence under the unrelenting wrath of the first judicial movement, until it finally capitulates in pieces, handing its dominion over to the Little Horn before it is finally relegated to the ash heap of history.
Although Daniel seems to place the initial judgment scene after the rise of Antichrist, he is actually relaying what had been happening in heaven contemporaneously with the succession of empires. The vision of the judgment scene beginning in Daniel 7:9 is in fact concurrent with the life of the Fourth Beast. This is seen in how Daniel relates the earthly and heavenly visions.
When relating the future history of earth, Daniel is meticulous in depicting a chronology sequentially, using ordinal numbers, adjectives and prepositions that depict succession in rigidly chronological order: the first beast (7:4); the second beast (7:5); another beast after that (7:6); a fourth beast after that (7:7); among the horns, another came up (7:8). First, second, fourth, another, another, after, after, etc… These are the words of an ordered chronology of a single sequence.
But when he explains that thrones were set up* in heaven (7:9), he drops the sequential terminology entirely. He does not say “then” thrones were set up, or “after” this thrones were set up, or “next” thrones were set up. He simply says “I watched (khaz-aw’) until thrones were set up,” and “watching” is what he had been doing since verse 2, as in ” I saw (khaz-aw’) in my vision by night.” In other words, “I watched the successions of empires unfold until thrones were set up for judgment.” This is precisely what Daniel had said of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream when the Stone appeared:
“Thou sawest (khaz-aw’) till that a stone … smote the image upon his feet…” (Daniel 2:34)
Nebuchadnezzer had watched the chronology until a Stone appeared for judgment and the target of judgment was the unfragmented Feet of the Statue. Daniel had watched the chronological succession until thrones were set up for judgment, and the target of judgment was the unfragmented Body of the Fourth Beast. Just as his vision of the Statue had been concurrent with the arrival of the Stone which was in fact part of the chronology, his heavenly vision of the thrones had been concurrent with the succession of beasts, and it, too, was part of the chronology.
The initial strike of the Stone formed the Toes and the initial judicial movement in chapter 7 was chronologically prior to the Horns (see Revelation 17:12 where the Horns are depicted chronologically after the Body). Thus, just as the Iron and Clay Toes emerge from the first judicial movement as fragments of Rome that await a future destruction (Daniel 2:34-35), the Horns emerge from the initial judicial movement as fragments of Rome that await a future judgment, and the Little Horn rises among them. That the Horns live on beyond the first judicial movement is evidenced first by the fact that only the Fourth Beast’s Body is committed to the flames (Daniel 7:11), and second from the Revelation 17 in which the Horns are united with Antichrist in the final confrontation at Christ’s second advent. The Horns emerge as the ruins of the first movement, and with the Little Horn, are destroyed in the second.
We can see the two judicial movements in the way Daniel essentially divides his vision:
1) He watches the vision of the beasts until thrones were set up for judgment (Daniel 7:9)
2) As judgment ensues against the Body of the Fourth Beast and the Little Horn emerges in the midst of the others speaking “great words,” Daniel watches until the Fourth Beast’s body is finally destroyed (Daniel 7:11) and the Little Horn takes dominion.
3) Then he watches as the Little Horn makes war against the saints, and prevails against them until the Ancient of days comes to take away dominion from the Little Horn and gives His dominion to the saints (Daniel 7:14, 21-22).
In the final battle (Revelation 17), the Antichrist is not alone in making war against the Lamb, but he has the Ten Horns with him. Thus, as in Daniel 2, two judicial movements are depicted in chapter 7, but this time with more details, for now we see the dominion of the Antichrist between the two movements. A first judicial movement is targeted initially at the Fourth Beast prior to its fragmentation, and a second judicial movement is targeted at the Little Horn and the Ten Horns that remain from the fragmentation.
As we mentioned last week—when those two judicial movements are collapsed into one, Roman Catholicism takes license either to point to a past Antichrist who is destroyed with the Roman Empire, or to a future Antichrist who is destroyed upon Christ’s return. In Taylor Marshall’s case, as we noted last week, he does both. But separate those two judicial movements as Daniel does, and a different history is revealed: the Roman Empire is punished into acquiescence in the first judicial movement, then hands over its dominion to Antichrist as the Fourth Empire fades into history and the Fifth Empire takes over. Having received an earthly dominion Antichrist then wears out the saints of the most high and then Christ returns and takes away his dominion and gives it to the saints in a second judicial movement.
The Harmony of the Two Chapters
In summary, the Iron and Clay Toes of the Fourth Empire, along with the Gold, Silver and Bronze, continue after the first judicial movement against the Feet of the Statue (Daniel 2). The Horns of the Fourth Beast, along with the Lion, the Bear and the Leopard, continue after the first judicial movement against the Body of the Fourth Beast (Daniel 7). As we noted last week, the first judicial movement depicted in Daniel 2:34 and Daniel 7:9-11 is none other than the opening of the Seals depicted in the courtroom scene beginning in Revelation 4-5, and it is because of the opening of the first two Seals that Diocletian was forced to break the Roman Empire into smaller geographic units—the Dioceses. This is what we described in our article entitled Do Not Weep for Nicomedia, as Diocletian had to respond to the Sasanians as they continued to soften Rome’s eastern defenses, and to the Crisis of the Third Century that had thrown Rome’s political affairs into disarray by 50 years of military coups. By the end of the succeeding century, Diocletian’s fragmentation of the empire was completed, and as we described in A See of One, Roman Catholicism immediately staked out three of the 13 final diocese as her own, claiming that she held title to the “Three Petrine Sees” — Rome, Alexandria and Antioch — as a single ecclesiastical prerogative. Thus did the first judicial movement cause the fragmentation of the Feet into Toes, and thus did the Little Horn remove three of the first Horns and come up among the remaining Ten in the waning years of the Roman Empire.
The Iron and Clay Toes, or Horns, having emerged from the first judicial movement, then share dominion with the Little Horn for a time (Revelation 17:12), and then “give their power and strength” to him (Revelation 17:13), and then together “[t]hese shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them” (Revelation 17:14) in a second judicial movement at Christ’s return. In that second judicial movement the Gold, Silver and Bronze, along with the Iron and Clay are together ground to dust such that “no place was found for them” (Daniel 2:35), which is to say that the Little Horn’s dominion is consumed and destroyed to the end (Daniel 7:26).
Between these two judicial movements lies the dominion of the Little Horn. But why does Daniel depict all of the preceding empires of Gold, Silver and Bronze as part of the second judicial movement? Why does Daniel say that the lives of the three preceding empires are allowed to go on after the first judicial movement?
“As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.” (Daniel 7:12).
The Little Horn is the Three Preceding Empires
What Daniel did not explain, but what John knew full well, was that the lives of the three preceding kingdoms were allowed to live on, embodied in the empire of the Little Horn. That Little Horn grew out of a fragmented Roman Empire, and was essentially Roman in origin but was the embodiment of the Babylonian, Medo-Persian and Greek empires before it. The Little Horn is the Beast of Revelation 13, and the Beast of Revelation 13 is the embodiment of the three preceding empires. John describes the Beast of Revelation for us in those very terms:
“And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.” (Revelation 13:1-2)
That the Beast of Revelation 13 is the Little Horn of Daniel 7, and the Little Horn is therefore the embodiment of the three preceding empires, is easily demonstrated in the comparison below. The Little Horn and the Beast both have a mouth speaking great things, and both make war against the saints and prevail.
Therefore, when Daniel says the lives of “the rest of the beasts” were prolonged for a time, he is referring to the Little Horn, the Antichrist, rising in the midst of the remnants of the fragmented Roman Empire. This is why E. J. Young was so wrong when he linked the destruction of the Body of the Fourth Beast to the destruction of the Little Horn:
“With the destruction of the little horn, the power of the fourth beast disappears entirely.” (Young, The Prophecy of Daniel, Eerdman’s 1949, (153), emphasis in original)
To the contrary. With the destruction of the Body of the Fourth Beast, the power of the Little Horn was just beginning, for in the Little Horn the Lion, the Bear and the Leopard receive a prolongation of life, and that Little Horn received the dominion of the Roman Empire. As Roman Catholic apologist Taylor Marshall wrote, “The [Roman Catholic] Church is not the Roman Empire, but it receives the Roman empire … The Roman Empire expired, but the Roman Church lived on.” (Marshall, The Eternal City, chs. 1 & 9). Indeed, it did. For the Roman Catholic Church is the Little Horn of Daniel 7.
Christ’s Earthly Kingdom is not Established until His Second Advent
After the body of the Fourth Beast is completely destroyed, “the rest of the beasts” live on in the empire of the Little Horn, and the other Ten Horns—the Iron and Clay Toes—live on with it. Just as the Lion, the Bear and the Leopard live on with the Ten Horns, so too do the Gold, Silver and Bronze live on with the Iron and Clay Toes, which is why Daniel depicts the second judicial movement against all five materials of the statue at once:
“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 2:35).
Because Daniel 7, Daniel 2 and Revelation 17 are harmonized, we see the same thing in Daniel 7. Knowing that the Little Horn is comprised of the Lion, the Bear and the Leopard (Revelation 13:2), and that the Ten Horns are smitten with the Little Horn at the final battle (Revelation 17), we can say that the when “they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end” (Daniel 7:26), we are seeing the same thing Nebuchadnezzar saw in Daniel 2:35—the destruction of the succession of all the empires together—at which Jesus receives possession of something that He did not yet have: both a heavenly kingdom and an earthly dominion together (Daniel 7:14, 27).
It should be carefully noted that it is only after the second judicial movement that the Stone becomes a great mountain and covers the earth. And it is only after the second judicial movement that the saints receive an earthly dominion. But because the two judicial movements of Daniel 2 and 7 are often collapsed into one single swift judicial act, Daniel’s language here is frequently taken to mean that a visible earthly kingdom was established by Christ at His first advent, and Roman Catholicism is taken to be that visible earthly kingdom.
But the fact is that Christ does not establish a visible earthly kingdom until His second advent. Just as Daniel testifies in chapter 2 that during the Roman Empire, i.e., “in the days of those kings,” the God of Heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed nor transferred to another people (Daniel 2:44), he also testifies that it does not become a visible earthly kingdom filling the earth until Christ returns (Daniel 2:35). That is, the kingdom of heaven introduced by Christ at his first advent was invisible, and “cometh not with observation” (Luke 17:20).
We see this same thing in Daniel 7 because in the first part of Daniel’s vision (7:1-14), there is simply no mention at all of the saints taking possession of a kingdom, so Daniel’s interpreter must fill in what Daniel cannot see—the saints taking possession of the heavenly kingdom during the Fourth Empire:
“These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.” (Daniel 7:17-18)
They did not take possession of an earthly kingdom, and so Daniel did not see it, and his interpreter must help him understand. But when Daniel finally does see the saints taking possession of a kingdom (Daniel 7:22), his interpreter again steps in to point out that what he had seen this time was the saints taking possession of a visible earthly kingdom under heaven at Christ’s second advent:
“But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end. And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.” (Daniel 7:26-27)
As surely as Jesus set up a heavenly kingdom in the days of the Roman Empire, the Antichrist set up an earthly kingdom shortly thereafter, and Roman Catholics have confused the latter for the former. As we have said before, theirs is One Kingdom Too Late. The result is that they have embraced Antichrist, thinking they have embraced Christ’s Church. Part of their error is that two judicial movements are collapsed into one. But their second mistake is to confuse dominion over an earthly kingdom with possession of a heavenly one. They are not the same thing, and dominion over an earthly kingdom is all Roman Catholicism has ever had. It should serve as a potent warning to Roman Catholics that neither Christ nor His saints are depicted as having earthly dominion between the two judicial movements. But there is someone who is. It is only Antichrist who possesses earthly dominion between them.
We will continue the series next week, exploring the difference between possession of a heavenly kingdom and dominion over an earthly one, as well as the “time and times and the dividing of time” (Daniel 7:25), or the “forty and two months” (Revelation 13:5), that Papal Rome was given power to make war against the saints, and to rule “over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.”
_______________________
* We understand that some interpreters see Daniel 7:9 to refer to the destruction of earthly thrones, i.e., “thrones were cast down“. However, the context is with a view to heavenly thrones which are “set down” in order for judgment to begin, as those depicted in Revelation 4.
Tim,
Do you believe that Scripture can be speaking proleptically, in the sense that something may be spoken of in current times, but actually is fulfilled in the future, or something speaking of the future, but fulfilled in then current time?
Walt,
Yes, I believe the Scripture can be speaking this way. One example is 1 Samuel 15:28, when Samuel says to Saul, “The LORD hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou.” Yet David had not yet been anointed King, and Saul would remain king for some time to come.
Is it your position that the Scripture may be speaking proleptically here in Daniel?
Thanks,
Tim
Tim,
Not my position, just thinking about the subject as I look at more outside ministerial sources in who has identified the Papacy as Antichrist in history, and in Patrick’s confession below, as well as those who hold to the primacy of the Pope.
Your mention of partial preterism last week gave me pause as who was its founder (outside the Jesuits) in the protestant movement, and why guys like Bob, CK and Jim all are so easily persuaded by Rome’s rock star Pope.
It just makes me wonder how the topic of brainwashing really works within the Romish church after so many have been deceived on the Papal side and so many have been slaughtered for rejecting the Papacy on the protestor side.
“The honourable titles and styles given unto the Virgin Mary by Ecclesiastical Writers, is another ground whereupon they do lean, who worshippeth the mother of our LORD: she is called Θεοτοκος, δεσποινα, αμιαντος, παναγια, αειπαρθενος, αχραντοσ, παραδεισος, εμψυχον θυσιαστηριον, του πιευματος αγιου κατασκιον ορος: that is to say, The mother of GOD, our Lady, undefiled, complete holy, a perpetual Virgin, unspotted, Paradise, a living Altar, the mountain over-shadowed by the holy {100} Spirit. All these honourable styles (I say) were given unto her in the writings of ancient Fathers, not of purpose to Deify the blessed Virgin, nor to bring in plurality of Gods, but to magnify the work of the LORD’s Incarnation. Methodius is so prodigal in his styles, that he calleth her αρτος ξωης, that is, the bread of life, attributing to her the honour due to CHRIST only. [John 6.35.] It were better done to abstain from words of superlative honours, belonging only to CHRIST, than after they are uttered, to be compelled by tolerable interpretations to lenify the absurdity of uncompetent speeches. The blessed Virgin while she was conversant with mortal men directed such as came to herself, to go to her Son, and to depend upon his blessed will and pleasure, saying unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it, [John 2.5]: much more now when she dwelleth in celestial mansions, it is her will that we should depend upon JESUS CHRIST her son, & her Saviour, her son & her GOD, her son & the creator of her body, whereinto he was content to be conceived by the Holy Ghost.”
http://www.truecovenanter.com/history/symson_history_century_4_treatise_invocation_of_saints.html
Patrick’s Confession. As Written by the Apostle of Ireland,
Composed about the year A.D. 455, And Translated by D. De Vinné.
“3. Patrick appears to have been a great lover of the Scriptures. In this short narrative he quotes and appeals to them no less than twenty-five times, although three of them are from what we now call the Apocrypha, which, however, was then incorporated with the Greek of the Seventy, which seems to have been the version, or at least a translation from it, which he used. And here it is especially worthy of notice, that in this Confession, or his other composition, Patrick never appeals to any other authority than the Scriptures. He never even mentions the Pope, nor appeals to any of the apostolical fathers, nor to any foreign council or church. When, as on the expulsion of Coroticus, he was required to avow his authority, he simply said, he “was a bishop constituted in Ireland,” and that “what he was, he had received of God.” Constitutum episcopum à Deo accepi id quod sum.—Patrologia, vol. LIII, p. 801. Here is no appeal to Rome, or any other authority; to any ordination or commission, other than from God.”
http://www.truecovenanter.com/history/patrick_confession_ireland.html
OF THE POWER AND PRIMACY OF THE POPE.
Treatise Compiled by the Theologians Assembled
at Smalcald, in the Year 1537.
[Editor note: The above treatise is provided for its historical value, demonstrating the efforts of the true Catholic Church of Jesus Christ to reform by shaking off the yoke of Antichristian Bondage and the Tyrannical Supremacy of the Pope over the Catholic Church; as well for its excellent demonstration and proof of that essential doctrine of the Protestant religion, professed by all the Protestant churches at the time of the Reformation, and for many years afterward, that is, That the Pope of Rome is the very Antichrist mentioned by the Apostle Paul in 2 Thessalonians, chapter 2. We do note however, that there are some things in this document which are not wholly square with Biblical principles of Ecclesiastical Government, such as (1) an implicit approval of the ordination of ministers by bishops (or pastors) acting alone without a plurality of pastors to constitute a Presbytery; and, (2) the notion that ecclesiastical authority is bestowed upon the multitude of believers, (that is, the Church Mystical rather than the Church Ministerial,) and is to be derived to particular church officers through them,—which is the heresy of the Independents.]
—————-
The Roman Pontiff claims for himself [in the first place] that by divine right he is [supreme] above all bishops and pastors [in all Christendom].
Secondly, he adds also that by divine right he has both swords, i.e., the authority also of bestowing and transferring kingdoms [enthroning and deposing kings, regulating secular dominions, etc.].
And thirdly, he says that to believe this is necessary for salvation. And for these reasons the Roman bishop calls himself [and boasts that he is] the vicar of Christ on earth.
These three articles we hold to be false, godless, tyrannical, and [quite] pernicious to the Church.
Testimonies from History.
VI. The Council of Nice resolved that the bishop of Alexandria should administer the churches in the East, and the Roman bishop the suburban, i.e., those which were in the Roman provinces in the West. From this start by a human law, i.e., the resolution of the Council, the authority of the Roman bishop first arose. If the Roman bishop already had the superiority by divine law, it would not have been lawful for the Council to take any right from him and transfer it to the bishop of Alexandria; nay, all the bishops of the East ought perpetually to have sought ordination and confirmation from the bishop of Rome.
VII. Again the Council of Nice determined that bishops should be elected by their own churches, in the presence of some neighboring bishop or of several. The same was observed [for a long time, not only in the East, but] also in the West and in the Latin churches, as Cyprian and Augustine testify. For Cyprian says in his fourth letter to Cornelius: Accordingly, as regards the divine observance and apostolic practice, you must diligently keep and practice what is also observed among us and in almost all the provinces, that for celebrating ordinations properly, whatever bishops of the same province live nearest should come together with the people for whom a pastor is being appointed, and the bishop should be chosen in the presence of the people, who most fully know the life of each one, which we also have seen done among us at the ordination of our colleague Sabinus, that by the suffrage of the entire brotherhood, and by the judgment of the bishops who had assembled in their presence, the episcopate was conferred and hands laid on him.
Cyprian calls this custom a divine tradition and an apostolic observance, and affirms that it is observed in almost all the provinces.
Since, therefore, neither ordination nor confirmation was sought from a bishop of Rome in the greater part of the world in the Latin and Greek churches, it is sufficiently apparent that the churches did not then accord superiority and domination to the bishop of Rome.
Such superiority is impossible. For it is impossible for one bishop to be the overseer of the churches of the whole world, or for churches situated in the most distant lands to seek ordination [for all their ministers] from one. For it is manifest that the kingdom of Christ is scattered throughout the whole world; and today there are many churches in the East which do not seek ordination or confirmation from the Roman bishop [which have ministers ordained neither by the Pope nor his bishops]. Therefore, since such superiority [which the Pope, contrary to all Scripture, arrogates to himself] is impossible, and the churches in the greater part of the world have not acknowledged [nor made use of] it, it is sufficiently apparent that it was not instituted [by Christ, and does not spring from divine law].
VIII. Many ancient synods have been proclaimed and held in which the bishop of Rome did not preside; as that of Nice and most others. This, too, testifies that the Church did not then acknowledge the primacy or superiority of the bishop of Rome.
IX. Jerome says: If the question is concerning authority, the world is greater than the city. Wherever there has been a bishop, whether at Rome, or Eugubium, or Constantinople, or Rhegium, or Alexandria, he is of the same dignity and priesthood.
X. Gregory, writing to the patriarch at Alexandria, forbids that he be called universal bishop. And in the Records he says that in the Council of Chalcedon the primacy was offered to the bishop of Rome, but was not accepted.
XI. Lastly, how can the Pope be over the entire Church by divine right when the Church has the election, and the custom gradually prevailed that bishops of Rome were confirmed by the emperors? Also, when for a long time there had been contests concerning the primacy between the bishops of Rome and Constantinople, the Emperor Phocas finally determined that the primacy should be assigned to the bishop of Rome. But if the ancient Church had acknowledged the primacy of the Roman Pontiff, this contention could not have occurred, neither would there have been need of the decree of the emperor.
http://www.truecovenanter.com/truelutheran/smalcald_treatise_de_potestate_et_primatu_papae.html
Among my ministerial friends who have passed away, no one stood higher than the late Professor Moses Stuart of Andover. I loved and honoured him while he lived, and venerate his memory now that he is gone. He was the father of biblical learning in this country. He did more to promote a knowledge of the original Scriptures, especially those of the old Testament, than any other individual. On most of his exegetical writings I set a high value, and it is with pain that I feel constrained to differ from him in regard to any of them. But his learned, laboured, exhaustive work on the Apocalypse I consider the least valuable of his Commentaries. The plan of this Commentary, borrowed mostly from the Germans, is founded on a false assumption; and this fact vitiates, confuses, and half spoils the whole.
Professor Stuart assumes that the Apocalypse was written about the year 68, just before the death of Nero, and two years previous to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.
In the Apocalypse, we have set before us, he says, three distinct catastrophes:
1. The fall of Jerusalem, in chapters 6-11.
2. The fall of Nero, and ultimately of Pagan Rome, in chapters 12-19.
3. The overthrow of Gog and Magog, after the close of the millennium.
There is no reference to Papal Rome anywhere.
3. Professor Stuart claims credit for his theory of the Apocalypse, on account of the absurd explications which have been given on the commonly received theory. ‘Men have regarded the Apocalypse as a prophetic syllabus of all civil and ecclesiastical history, from the author’s time to the end of the world.’
We admit that a great many absurd and foolish things have been said by commentators, though we doubt whether any have gone so far as Professor Stuart represents, making the Apocalypse a syllabus of all civil and ecclesiastical history. But have there not been as absurd explications by Germans and Roman Catholics, who in general adopt the theory of Professor Stuart? It would be easy to show as much as this, without looking beyond the pages of Stuart’s Commentary.
Professors Stuart and Cowles think to avoid such absurdities, by saying that most of the symbols which John employs have no particular significance. They are the mere dress and furniture of the poem. The seals and the trumpets mean nothing, except that Jerusalem was to be destroyed, as besieged cities commonly are, by the sword, the famine, and pestilence.
http://www.covenanter.org/Postmil/AntiPreterist/pondreview.htm
TIM–
Daniel never mentions a Fifth Empire. The little horn is an extremity of the Fourth. As in you said the 13 diocese had to have been in place before the little horn destroyed 3 to make ten, the toes had to have been part of the statue before the stone hit in Daniel 2. That would be the only way the attributes of the previous 3 empires could be given the little horn–the toes were part of the completed statue.
One completed judgement, not two.
Thanks, Bob. I’m not sure I follow what you said here:
I don’t understand why the Toes would have to exist before the Stone strikes in order to the Little Horn to remove Three Horns. In your next sentence, you said,
I don’t understand why the Toes had to be part of the Statue when the Stone strikes it in order for the Little Horn to have the attributes of the three preceding empires.
I’m not saying your observation is wrong—I just don’t think I understand it.
Thanks,
Tim
TIM–
You said: “I don’t understand why the Toes would have to exist before the Stone strikes in order to the Little Horn to remove Three Horns.”
In your explanation as to why the final picture of the Fourth Beast had to have ten horns, you said their had to have been 13 horns existing first (which Daniel doesn’t mention) before the little horn destroyed three. That is what you read into Daniel 7 for your explanation to work.
In Daniel 2, you say that the ten toes were not part of the statue until after the stone hit the feet and broke it into pieces.
So, using your same example of reading into Daniel, I’m saying that those toes had to already have been their because they are part of the feet, which are attached to the legs, which are attached to the torso, which are attached to the chest and arms, which are attached to the head which make up a complete statue. Thus the line of attributes of the whole statue are represented in the toes. That is why when the feet are shattered, it causes the whole statue to fall and be smashed to pieces.
The ten toes belong to the feet just like the ten horns belong to the Fourth Beast.
Biblically speaking, the number four symbolizes the earth or things earthly. Ergo, the Four Beasts represent four earthly empires. Also biblically speaking, the number ten symbolizes completeness in law and government. Ten toes or ten horns are symbols of the authority of law and government given to the Fourth Empire.
The number five is the symbol of grace and redemption. There is no Fifth Empire. And the one that you depict is one of judgement, not grace.
Thank you, Tim.
You’re welcome, Maria, and thanks for dropping in.
Tim,
If you get a chance, please watch this BBC series on John Knox and the Scottish Covenanters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q78dQkW9Ofg&list=PLlRU8NuS9rKA9-jH7UBIYxx-EdrKHxSzH
If will be helpful to get some background on the seeds you are planting speaking against Rome and calling the Papacy Antrichrist. History has a tendency to repeat itself.