"As interpreted by conservative expositors, the vision of Daniel [in chapter 7] provides the most comprehensive and detailed prophecy of future events to be found anywhere in the Old Testament."235
"The vision's setting in the Book of Daniel makes it the book's central hinge. In language [i.e., Aramaic], it belongs with the preceding chapters, while structurally it rounds off a chiasm begun in chap. 2:
2 A vision of four kingdoms and their end (Nebuchadnezzar)
3 Faithfulness and a miraculous rescue (the three friends)
4 Judgment presaged and experienced (Nebuchadnezzar)
5 Judgment presaged and experienced (Daniel)
6 Faithfulness and a miraculous rescue (Daniel)
7 A vision of four kingdoms and their end (Daniel) . . ."236
This is the first of four visions that Daniel recorded in chapters 7-12 (cf. chs. 8; 9; 10-12). In this great chapter Daniel revealed the consecutive history of four major world empires concluding with the coming of Jesus Christ from heaven and the establishment of His kingdom, a fifth kingdom. Thus it provides a framework for more detailed revelation of these kingdoms that follows in the Book of Daniel and in the New Testament, particularly in the Book of Revelation. Chapter 7 gives more information about the four kingdoms that Daniel had already revealed in chapter 2 (cf. Ps. 2; 110).
"In chapter 2, the four earthly kingdoms and Christ's heavenly kingdom were seen in their outward political appearance; by contrast, chapter 7 presents God's estimate of their innermost moral and spiritual features.
"In chapter 2, the symbols were taken from inanimate objects; here in chapter 7, they are taken from the animate. In chapter 2, King Nebuchadnezzar saw the splendor of world empires portrayed in the dazzling statue of a man, while the Kingdom of God was symbolized by a stone. By contrast, in chapter 7, Daniel's vision reveals the animalistic character of world empires and the fact that it is only in the Kingdom of God that man's full dignity is realized--in the Son of Man."237
"Almost all interpreters understand that these two visions are to be interpreted in the same way. . . . These four kingdoms, according to the interpretation commonly received in the church, are the Babylonian, the Medo-Persian, the Macedo-Grecian, and the Roman. In this interpretation and opinion,' Luther observes, all the world are agreed, and history and fact abundantly establish it.' This opinion prevailed till about the end of the last century, for the contrary opinion of individual earlier interpreters had found no favour. But from that time, when faith in the supernatural origin and character of biblical prophecy was shaken by Deism and Rationalism, then as a consequence, with the rejection of the genuineness of the book of Daniel the reference of the fourth kingdom to the Roman world-monarchy was also denied."238
The opinion of rationalists is that there is no such thing as predictive prophecy. Therefore someone must have written the Book of Daniel after the events recorded happened.
"Critics hold that the real author of Daniel lived in the time of the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes (175-163 B.C.), and that from the viewpoint of the second century B.C. he looked backward over the preceding four centuries, organized history in a manner which was significant for him, and made this the basis for anticipating a climax to the Maccabean persecution then under way. Accordingly, the pseudo-Daniel considered Antiochus as symbolic of the wickedness of the powers of this world which the author believed were soon to be judged by God, who was to intervene and replace the rule of tyranny under Antiochus by that of the saints of the Most High."239
These critics believe that the four empires in view in chapters 2 and 7 are not Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome, but Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece.240Rome was not a significant enough power in the world in the second century B.C. to warrant identifying it as the fourth kingdom, according to them. However, Jesus Christ spoke of an aspect of the fourth kingdom as still future (Matt. 24:15; cf. Dan. 12:11). The Book of Revelation, written close to the end of the first century A.D., likewise predicts the fulfillment of aspects of this kingdom in the future (e.g., Rev. 13). Furthermore Daniel 9:26 predicted the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of Jerusalem both of which happened in the first century A.D.
Critics support their identification of the empires with two main points. First, references to Darius the Mede in chapter 6 indicate to them that the Median Empire was a significant enough one by itself for the writer to single it out. However, that very chapter states that it was the jointkingdom of the Medes and Persians that was then in power (6:8, 12, 15). Second, Greece would have been the dominant world power when pseudo-Daniel wrote in the second century B.C. This argument assumes the critics' hypothesis that someone wrote Daniel in the second century and reads the text through that grid.
A better approach is to respect the text as it stands and to seek to harmonize it with the rest of Scripture and the facts of history. This leads to the more natural conclusion that Daniel received revelations of the future from his sixth-century perspective from God. History has shown that there was one unified Medo-Persian Empire and that what Daniel wrote about the third and fourth empires fits Greece and Rome better than it fits Persia and Greece. It also shows that what Daniel predicted of the first three kingdoms, as well as some of what he wrote about the fourth kingdom, has happened. Scripture indicates that some revelation concerning the fourth kingdom and all the revelation about Daniel's fifth kingdom describes what is still future from our perspective in history.
