Page 80 - Daniel

normal interpretation that Daniel had in view Medo-Persia and Greece,
empires that he later identified by name (5:28; 8:20–21; 11:2). The
statement that the second kingdom was “inferior” means inferior in
quality, but not necessarily in every respect.

Persia actually had more territory than ancient Babylon, and the
Greek Empire was greater than the Persian. The Roman Empire was
greatest of all in extent. To infer, however, from the larger geographic

area of succeeding kingdoms that they were not “inferior” is to misread
both the meaning of the dream and Daniel’s comment upon it. Daniel
did not say that the head was larger in size than the body, but the nature
of the metal, gold, was more precious than that of silver or bronze,
which were obviously inferior metals. History certainly confirms that the
Medo-Persian Empire, and the empire of Alexander that followed, lacked
the central authority and fine organization of the Babylonian Empire.

The image and Daniel’s comments on it are most accurate. Daniel
himself seems to imply that the inferiority of the succeeding empires
does not prevent them from wide geographic control, for he specifically
stated that the third kingdom will “rule over all the earth.”

The descending scale of value of the four metals suggests the
degeneration of the human race through the ages, as implied in Genesis
4. Classical writers such as Hesiod (Works and Days, 109–201) and Ovid
(Metamorphoses I, 89–150) conceive of history in this way. This concept
contradicts the evolutionist’s interpretation of human history. Instead of

mankind beginning in the dust and consummating in fine gold, God
reveals mankind in the times of the Gentiles to begin with fine gold and
end in dust.

The descending value of the metals, however, permits their ascending
strength, which suggests increased military might during the times of the
Gentiles, leading to the final world conflict of Revelation 16 and 19 to
which Daniel refers (11:36–45).

Critics who say that Daniel could not have been written in the sixth
century have also questioned the accuracy of the list of kingdoms. They
try to identify the second and third kingdoms as Persia and Media, as if
they were separate empires. That would make Greece the fourth empire

and thus reduce the prophetic element of this chapter to a minimum by
eliminating the Roman Empire, which they say even a second-century