Triton57

Daniel 7:3, 7 "And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another. ... After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it [was] diverse from all the beasts that [were] before it[H6925]; and it had ten horns." The first clue that these four beasts all coexist at the same time in history lies in the fact that while they are diverse, the fourth beast is seen in the vision with the three other beasts before it. If you look at how H6925 is used everywhere in the Old Testament, it is clear it is almost exclusively used 46 times in 38 verses in the context of before, in front of. This is a spacial definition, not a temporal one. Even in the context of the same vision it is used spacially. Daniel 7:8, 10, 13, 20 "I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before[H6925] whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn [were] eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. ... A fiery stream issued and came forth from before[H6925] him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before[H6925] him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. ... I saw in the night visions, and, behold, [one] like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before[H6925] him. ... And of the ten horns that [were] in his head, and [of] the other which came up, and before[H6925] whom three fell; even [of] that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look [was] more stout than his fellows." The meaning of before makes all four beasts contemporaneous. This is also confirmed elsewhere in this same vision. Daniel 7:11-12 "I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld [even] till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame. As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time." Revelation 19:20 "And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone." In order for the fourth dreadful beast to be cast into the lake of fire at Christ's coming and the other 3 beasts that were before him have their lives prolonged for a season and time, they all must have coexisted at the same time and that time is explicitly tied to the end, yet future for us. As you rightly pointed out in your previous post, Revelation 13 uses the same identifiers of the lion, bear, leopard, and 10 horned beast that Daniel 7 does. The difference is that Daniel 7 reveals them explicitly distinct from each other while Revelation 13 reveals them all as aspects of the Dragon in his kingdom. And this isn't any wonder since the whole world gives their power over to the beast. So to me, it would seem that Daniel is seeing these 4 beasts representative of the world quartered in power while John sees the 3 quarters of the world giving their power over to the beast controlling the 4th quarter. And so they are unified as one in his kingdom at the end. And this is where I agree that Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 are tied together. But while these are locked in time to the end, Daniel 2 is likewise locked in time, from the period of Babylon to Rome, all of which are long dead and no more rule in the earth. This is why I see the Daniel 7 beasts as coexisting together, at the end of the age.

I'm keeping an open mind, yet there are some foundational ways of reading scripture I've learned to be cautious of. One of those is giving any credulity to chapter and verse separations, which seems to be a focus in your interpretation. There seems to be a need to use 34 and 35 as a logical split defining two different times separated by several thousand years. Yet the separations as we know them were introduced around 1227 AD. Prior to that it was just unseparated text bound together. Now if we transport ourselves back to a time before chapter and verse separations, is there any logical reason to split the meaning across time as you do? "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." The stone hits the image on the feet, breaks them to pieces, then become like chaff blown by the wind and are not found anymore. Meanwhile, the stone becomes a great mountain that fills the whole earth. To me, a reading of the text as intended does not denote any kind of separation, it becomes a sentence spoken to the king revealing the dream he forgot. That the image is mentioned being broken two sentences in a row doesn't denote for me any kind of distinction, just repetition as is often done in speaking. Some good examples from elsewhere that chapter and verse separations cause people to miss important narratives are Daniel 11:40-12:1 and Revelation 19:11-20:6. These are usually more commonly missed because they are chapter separations and sometimes people focus on subjects by chapter or only read chapters at a time. In the case of Daniel 11-12, the connection between the conquering of the false christ and his death in Daniel 11:40-45 are disconnected from the very next sentence tying the time of his death to the abomination of desolation and unparalleled time Yeshua in Matthew 24:15-29, Mark 13:14-23 and Jeremiah 30:4-7 speak about. This can completely sever the connection of John's vision of the head the dies and lives again, that is the 7th and becomes the 8th head, or king. Likewise, some focus on the binding of Satan and the millennium separate from Christ's return in glory in chapter 19 where the beast and false prophet are defeated and cast into the lake of fire. While a likely smaller subset miss this, the depiction is important to understand the order of the prophetic narrative. So I can keep an open mind to a point that I take God at His Word with a logical mind and eliminate as much of man's interpretation. Now I don't think that chapter and verse separations are bad, I would be lost without them. I just don't put any significance to them aside from finding a scripture based on agreed upon separations so we're all on the same page. I agree that Daniel 2 covers the time from Babylon to eternity in a generic way. Specifically it defines the earthly temporal kingdoms from Babylon to Rome and the spiritual eternal kingdom of God from Rome to eternity with the everlasting kingdom of God. The fact that the kingdom fills the whole earth and we know Yeshua will establish His kingdom on earth for 1,000 years before eternity would seem to suggest that the ultimate fulfillment of this vision regarding the temporal fulfillment will come when Yeshua does. And so in this generic sense I agree that all prophecy from Babylon forward in all of scripture is taking place within the timeframe of this vision. However, the details of other prophecies are not revealed in what this vision actually was. There are some elements like the order of kingdoms we can connect with John's vision of the 8 heads of the Dragon through time, but there are also attempts to do things like compare Daniel 7's 4 beasts to the four metals and lock them similarly to the kingdoms of Babylon through Rome/revived Rome. In my view this is a mistake built off the general assumption that the mention of the fourth kingdom and iron and 10 that is destroyed at Christ coming. It feels like a lot of valid associations, I used to feel this way. But when you examine Daniel 7 by itself very carefully, some very important distinctions are made that cause it to be temporally mutually exclusive from the kingdoms that Daniel 2 is talking about. And further seeing that the way these four beasts are only ever mentioned together in one other place in John's vision of the Dragon at the end locks all four of the contemporaneous beasts to the end times just before Christ's return. But what's amazing is that seeing Daniel 2 and 7 temporally separated doesn't conflict with the interpretation of anything. Indeed it reveals a series of foreshadows Yeshua Himself pointed out in Matthew 24:15 when He pointed to Daniel to understand the abomination of desolation. So while Daniel 2 covers a vast expanse of time, I think we need to be careful about using the limited information in that vision to make associations that don't have a solid foundation. As I mentioned before, each vision must be examined on its own and defined first within itself before looking out at other prophecies to define it. With each one approached like this, many times they define themselves and associations are made, but I've found the common revived Roman Empire paradigm that I once held has some clay mixed in that make it weak, and further examination makes it crumble. It's very interesting you mention the misunderstanding that the Jews had when Yeshua didn't conquer Rome, at least not as they expected it. I too think Daniel 2 reveals the kingdom of God has conquered Rome, although not as many expected it. I think scripture points to a deception for the Jews that is achieved through giving them what they desire in the way they desire it, a poison pill encased in some truth. I went off on a whole tangent on this idea that I took out, but may get into later. Regarding Yeshua not coming to destroy but divide, what scriptures are you referring to for this? It seems that you are focused very much on the verses to define timelines. As I mentioned, I don't view chapter and verse designations as sacred or prophetic. This underlying foundation of how I interpret scripture will likely limit my ability to accept your conclusion, not because I'm unwilling to examine it, but because I have examined it. We agree that the striking of the image and its destruction is not immediate, but Daniel 2:34-35 are not differentiated in my mind because they simply speak of the same event. The feet of iron and clay, just as the toes that are part of feet as evidenced from the interpretation in verses 40-43, they are, like the feet, made of iron and clay. The toes are specifically called out being the very end of the statue as the kingdom being partly strong and partly broken. The toes are part of the 4th kingdom just as the feet and just as the legs. All are the 4th kingdom, but the toes represent the end of it, divided and broken. That the stone strikes the feet and the toes are called out separately actually points to the establishment of the kingdom and its initial growth in 30 AD before the toes are called out later. I don't know about everyone else, but I believe the whole image is destroyed when those two elements are struck because Daniel tells the king that "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." Because I can't justify verse separation as prophetic, it seems clear that all elements of the image are destroyed when the two elements of the image are struck and following that they are carried away and no place was found for them. If the image is broken and not found, that to me is the definition of utter destruction. I'm not sure I understand the distinction between pottery clay and ceramic clay. Daniel 2 is the only place where "pottery" clay and "miry" clay are presented and they would seem to be a distinction without a difference. I would be curious to see where your distinction lies in that. I agree that there is a distinction between faithful Jews that accepted Yeshua and unfaithful Jews that were blinded to the truth of the arrival of the Messiah. This has continued on through time as some Jews have come to know Yeshua as the Messiah, while others hold to the interpretations of men explicitly working to reject Yeshua as the Messiah. These are still waiting for the Messiah who already arrived. However, I don't understand the distinction in clay as it relates to the fourth kingdom of the image to which both the clay and iron belong. Israel was never part of Rome except that they had no choice, just as they were not part of Babylon or Greece. However, there was no clay introduced in those kingdoms even though the prophetic narrative that included Israel was distinctly present in them. I agree that Daniel 2:34 is the cross in 30 AD, the establishment of the kingdom, I just see verse 35 in the same sentence and context. As you mentioned previously, it wasn't an immediate breaking up. If 1,000 years is as a day to the Lord, it took a good 9-33 hours after the stone struck the image for it to no longer exist. Either way, per verse 35, the statue is gone as of today, which I believe we can see with our own eyes. As I mentioned before, I don’t see the Roman Catholic Church, or Papal Rome, as a valid sit in for the political government of the Roman Empire, it's a different thing entirely. I hinted at it before, but the image is a progression of kingdoms through time. As such, the higher the image the older it is and the toes would be the very end of the image. That the stone struck the feet would indicate that there was still part of the kingdom that would exist after the feet were struck. The feet and toes are both iron (Rome's strength) and clay (Rome's weakness) mixed together. While Rome always had its internal conflict, the time from around 27 BC under Augustus began a 200 year period of Pax Romana and a sense of unity in the kingdom. The Star of Bethlehem: The Star That Astonished the World by Ernest L. Martin goes into this a bit in light of the signs in the heavens that occurred around the birth of Christ. It seems clear that just as the progression of kingdoms went through time, so would the ratio of iron to clay go over time. While the stone struck the feet, the Roman Empire was still mostly strong historically. It wasn't until around 50 years after the putting down of the final Bar Kokhba Revolt, when the Jewish-Roman Wars finally ended. As Daniel 9:26 stated, "the people of the prince that shall come [Titus] shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;[70 AD] and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war [Jewish-Roman Wars 63-136 AD] desolations are determined." It is verse 42 that would seem to point to the later growing weakness of the toes that come after the feet at the end of Pax Romana. Rome went "from a kingdom of gold to one of iron and rust." [Roman History by Cassius Dio p. 72.36.4] The once strong iron legs were getting weaker over time. In verse 43 we see what I believe Chris White speaks of in his Daniel commentary of the final death throes of the Rome the vision is speaking of, where royal intermarriage between the East and West are attempted to keep the kingdom strong, but the West is consumed. Verse 44 states that it is in the days of these kings that God sets up a kingdom. Clearly we can't get too dogmatic about the exact year, month, and day in terms of which kings are being spoken of, it seems a more generic idea that during the various kings at the end of the Roman Empire that the kingdom of God consumes them. And in 380 AD Nicene Christianity was made the state church of the Roman Empire. While the pagan/papal Rome clearly did not live up to the true teaching of Christ, the foundation was based on the same scripture, interpreted to control the people much of the time. 100 years later the Western Roman Empire was gone. Israel as a nation was several hundred years removed and disbursed into the world. With the later reforms and accessibility of the text to the masses, Christianity consumed the hearts and minds of those with ears to hear and the stone that established and defined the kingdom grew into a mountain that is filling the earth to this day. I would love to support you by purchasing a copy, what is the name of the book and perhaps others might also be interested. Sorry if you mentioned the title and I missed it.

So what about a gold head equates to a lion, silver chest/arms to a bear, bronze belly/thighs to a leopard, or iron legs & feet of clay to the terrifying beast? I know the 10 horns and toes are often associated because most feet have 10 toes. I know the fact that iron mixed in the 10 toes and iron teeth are often associated. But Daniel 2:42 "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 7:7 "After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it [was] diverse from all the beasts that [were] before it; and it had ten horns." There seems to be a distinct difference in the 4th kingdom's toes that are partly broken with the iron teeth beast with 10 horns that is strong exceedingly. What do the metal parts of the image have to do with the animals? Perhaps the comparison of Daniel 7 to Revelation 13 is where that connection is made because the animals are mentioned there and the beast with 10 horns. I actually hold to that view as well, there is an explicit link between these 4 beasts in Daniel 7 and John's vision in Revelation 13, the only other place where these 4 all exist. However, Daniel 2 is explicitly tied to Babylon - Rome and if these 4 beasts in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 unified as one are at the end of the age, how can you say they are historical kingdoms? Is the suggestion that Babylon is represented as part of the end time false christ kingdom?

That's an interesting perspective on Nebuchadnezzar's perception, I hadn't really thought that deeply about it and I like your thoughts on this. I also had not made any connection between the head of gold and the stone as kings, interesting. It's interesting how the metals in terms of mineral hardness go from iron to brass to silver to gold, iron being the hardest. Yet Nebuchadnezzar's told that the silver kingdom that follows his head of gold is inferior to his. In terms of general perceived value, the metals also go opposite of their hardness. And of course we know iron is used to associate with breaking in pieces and being strong, as Yeshua rules with a rod of iron as well. Aside from the value of the metals, I've wondered what about the kingdoms would make the stronger more inferior and I can't say I know enough of history to come to a conclusion other than the idea that the more malleable the metal, the more superior and the more hard the more oppressive the rule. While Nebuchadnezzar had the pride of a king, he also was humbled before God and recognized His superiority in Daniel 4. The further along through time it seems this wasn't the case. You mentioned also that the Jews had everything they needed to understand and I would agree. I think this also points to the central nature of Israel to the vision. It was the head of gold's domination of Israel that brought Daniel and Israel into captivity. The sequence of kingdoms that followed were to be understood in relation to Israel. Now her placement in the land tended to make her the center of many conflicts, but they weren't to expect the transition of power in some far off land to be the transition of the metals with the changes in the kingdoms, it was always involving Israel. The same thing happens with the heads of the Dragon John sees in his visions. I think this is also why the image in Nebuchadnezzar's vision ends with the Roman Empire that destroyed Israel and flung her people into the diaspora. There was no Israel for the kingdoms of the world to interact with anymore, not until 1948 was that the case again. And when getting into the gap between the first 69 and 70th week, I think the same principle is seen. The start of the week was tied to Ezra's return to Jerusalem to teach the statues so that proper temple ministry according to those statutes could once again continue and ended 483 years later at the beginning of the ministry of Christ. Then, upon His rejection, destruction was determined and for 40 years after 30 AD, the temple was not the same with all sorts of strange occurrences until its destruction. Once again, there was no Israel to count weeks for. And the Israel of modern times is not following the statutes of God given to them at Sinai and it isn't until that begins again that the 70th week of Daniel will begin. If I have anything wrong in my understanding of your view, please let me know where I'm wrong.

I don’t feel we should take the first mention of the explanation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream without the interpretation of it, they are part of the same narrative, none of which Nebuchadnezzar could remember. So Daniel saying feet and then 9 sentences later saying feet and toes isn't something I would call a distinction personally. The symbology of the legs of iron and feet of iron and clay being the last kingdom where the stone strikes and destroys it is interpreted with the establishment of the kingdom of God. It breaks all the kingdoms and consumes them, and Rome ceased to be a kingdom shortly after His first coming while the kingdom of God spiritually transformed the hearts and minds of those in all earthly kingdoms as I see it. I know you say He broke apart and did not destroy, so the image is around after the cross, which I agree with. It's pretty clear that the statue breaking apart is only the start of the process. However, I consider verse 35 stating "the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them" to be analogous to the kingdom no longer existing, just as chaff is blown away and found no more. You say the clay represents the Jews in Pagan Rome at the time of His first coming, being subjugated and controlled. Wouldn't it then follow that the elimination of the Roman Empire, Pagan Rome, as a controlling and subjugating force would be the release of the clay? When did Rome fall? Whether the Western Roman Empire around 476 AD or the Byzantine Empire around 1453 AD, it was at least 500+ years ago, which is objectively not the end times given all that must take place and the Messianic Kingdom that has not yet come. And as I understand your view, Pagan Rome became Papal Rome and through both transitions the Jews represent the clay. So in your view the political Pagan Rome didn't mix with Israel and later as we saw through history, Papal Rome and the Jews fell into the same inability to cleave?

I agree that Yeshua has more to do, and indeed His mission is not fully complete. At the same time, the context of the vision is the elimination of the kingdoms of the world and consumption of their control into the kingdom of God, which was only made possible by the mission of His first coming in establishing that kingdom. John 19:30 "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost." James 1:15 "Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." 2 Corinthians 5:20-21 "Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech [you] by us: we pray [you] in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. For he hath made him [to be] sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." I see this as an already but not yet prophecy, which it seems we're not far apart on except that the destruction of the image for you is yet future and for me it's history. We both agree it began at His first coming, it's just the interpretation of the image and how long it's sticking around. I don't think the mountain filling the whole earth will be fully complete until the Messianic Kingdom, but it is growing through time. I do think that the image in its entirety was destroyed and consumed with the death of the Western Roman Empire because of the wording of the prophecy, historical record, and Israel no longer existing after Rome destroyed her. Yeshua is the center of prophecy as is His plan to restore His relationship with His people who are blinded to Him.

I can see where the idea of separation leads to the idea of the wheat and tares separation at the harvest at the end of the age. However, the "stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces" is interpreted for us as "the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed." Luke 17:20-21 "And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you." The bride of Christ, the faithful and obedient church, are representing the kingdom of God as faithful imagers of Christ in the world. It's an already but not yet prophecy as the kingdom will not be in its fullness until the King rules from Jerusalem. Colossians 1:25-29 "Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; [Even] the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily." The harvest is now and we are the laborers, meant to grow the kingdom of God until His coming when He will bring and end to the church age when He calls us home.

The interpretation of the iron and clay is for a specific purpose of distinction we haven't gotten to yet, but since you mention it here I think it's an important distinction that doesn't speak to the kind of detail you are assigning it, ie: Papal Rome. The fourth kingdom begins with legs of iron and ends with feet and toes of iron and clay, both elements of the fourth kingdom I think we agree. Daniel 2:40-43 "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." This fourth kingdom (iron and clay) is partly strong like the iron, and partly broken like the clay. The reason for this is that "they," related to the kingdom, mingle themselves with the seed of men. But this "mingling" does not strengthen because it represents the iron and clay mixture that does not cleave together. Since the only connection to these metals is a kingdom, and the only further representation is that Nebuchadnezzar is the head of gold, I don’t feel it's much of a leap to say that the "they" in regards to the kingdoms is referring to the leaders of the kingdoms. Now the word "mingle" is only used in this vision in scripture and in conjunction with "seed," which is also only used here and means to comingle with the offspring of men. I like Chris White's study on this in his book Daniel (A Commentary). He goes into some detail on this in chapter 2 that I won't post here, but there were several attempts of royal intermarriage meant to save the collapsing Western Roman Empire. The image only goes to Rome, and the Roman Empire that ruled Jerusalem at the time of Christ's first coming is no longer an earthly kingdom. The image does not represent a spiritual kingdom and the iron and clay exist together as part of the image and are also together struck at the time the stone's kingdom is established, and are found no more. The iron was strong, but then part of the kingdom became weak, something we saw happen in history when the capital of Rome was moved to Constantinople and the Western Roman Empire responsible for the elimination of Israel as a nation collapsed shortly after it fulfilled Yeshua's prophecy of her destruction. The only perceived remnant of Rome ruling over anything might be considered by some to be the Roman Catholic Church. However, the fact that the Roman Empire took ownership of a structured version of Christianity and then ceased to be a kingdom ruling politically does not in my mind mean that Rome still exists as an earthly kingdom in any form. All the elements of the statue were tied to earthly rulers and the stone was distinguished in that it was a spiritual kingdom not of this world and superior. A spiritual kingdom of obedient followers of Christ exists within a denomination that also contains imposters, just like Baptist churches and non-denominational churches, and every other church does. But those that are faithful within them represent the mountain that is filling the whole earth, not the political kingdom that rules over earthly kingdoms IMO. With the children of Israel seen as the clay in the statue representing Pagan Rome doesn't fit with the other metals that were not mingled with clay though they all involved Israel. And Israel didn't weaken Rome, they fell under the iron rod of Rome and were scattered while the Roman Empire lived on for several centuries. I just don't see any perspective that can extend any remnant of the image to today let alone Christ's second coming. And I think Daniel 2 stands on its own Biblically and historically, fitting into the prophetic narrative without having to be shoehorned into other prophecies. Not all prophecies tie together directly, but they all tie into history and the future in their respective points.

I'm in agreement on the purpose of the threshing floor and can also see the associations with the harvest at the end of the age, but I think jumping to this association as evidence of this occurring at the end of the age is going beyond the point being made here. Yes, the threshing floor is part of the harvest process, but the focus is not on the harvest, it's on the threshing floor. Daniel 2:35 "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." The image being painted is simply what every Israeli understood about the harvest time as you laid out. The statue that has been broken is like the undesired casing of the wheat that is dealt with by thrashing the grain apart from it and letting the wind blow it away so that what is valuable remains. I think you are taking it beyond its basic meaning to attach the threshing done at harvest time to the harvest at the end of the age. I understand the logical progression that leads to your connection, and perhaps if there was a generalized harvest being spoken of and not a specific example of an action associating the statue to the chaff that is never seen again once it is blown away by the winds, then I may also accept that connection. But a harvest is only implied by the fact that you need the wheat to separate the chaff. This one part of the harvest is the extent of the analogy between the image and the chaff. If we look at the examples of the harvest in the parables and visions, the focus is much different. Matthew 13:38-43 "The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked [one]; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." Note the good seed are the children of the kingdom established by the stone. The tares are not the chaff, they never make it to the threshing floor because they're not wheat, the tares are just cast into the fire. This is the harvest of Yeshua at the end of the age, when the fulness of the Gentiles has come and He gathers them before the day of the Lord and the wrath of God. Revelation 14:14-20 "And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud [one] sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle. And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe. And he that sat on the cloud thrust in his sickle on the earth; and the earth was reaped. And another angel came out of the temple which is in heaven, he also having a sharp sickle. And another angel came out from the altar, which had power over fire; and cried with a loud cry to him that had the sharp sickle, saying, Thrust in thy sharp sickle, and gather the clusters of the vine of the earth; for her grapes are fully ripe. And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast [it] into the great winepress of the wrath of God. And the winepress was trodden without the city, and blood came out of the winepress, even unto the horse bridles, by the space of a thousand [and] six hundred furlongs." 2 Peter 3:7 "But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." Here the harvest is spoken in the context of the end of the age, the separation of wheat from tares, but the harvest is even more spoken of in the context of the spreading of the Gospel, the growth of the kingdom, the stone growing into a mountain that fills the whole earth. Matthew 9:35-38 "And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people. But when he saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion on them, because they fainted, and were scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd. Then saith he unto his disciples, The harvest truly [is] plenteous, but the labourers [are] few; Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest." Luke 10:1-2 "After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come. Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly [is] great, but the labourers [are] few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest." John 4:34-38 "Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work. Say not ye, There are yet four months, and [then] cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest. And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together. And herein is that saying true, One soweth, and another reapeth. I sent you to reap that whereon ye bestowed no labour: other men laboured, and ye are entered into their labours." Mark 4:26-29 "And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the ground; And should sleep, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how. For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear. But when the fruit is brought forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come." So I think to connect the comparison of the image's disappearance in the wind to that of the chaff on the threshing floor to the harvest overall takes the analogy too far. The example of the separation of the faithful from the unfaithful is tied to two different plants and only the wheat makes it to the threshing floor, while the majority of scripture about the harvest is tied to the church age from the time of Christ to the fulness of the Gentiles. This is the very time in its early growth that the stone consumes the image and it is found no more.

Isn't verse 34 where the image is broken into pieces though? I believe it was at Yeshua's first coming when the image would be broken into pieces, but you seem to be pointing to that being at the end. I believe it's important to first examine the tree before backing up to see the forest, but chapter and verse separations are not original to the text and feels a little too much like looking at the ant climbing on the bark of the tree. Verses 34 & 35 to me are not divided into the first and second comings, they both speak of the breaking of the iron and clay and disappearance of the whole statue because of it. I agree with you that verse 34 represents Christ's first coming, I just disagree that 35 represents His second coming. They seem to speak of the same event at the same time when the material earthly kingdoms that had ruled Israel since Babylon were replaced by an eternal spiritual kingdom that was established at Christ's first coming and, through His body of followers, consumed them over time and has grown to fill the whole earth.

Matthew 21:42-46 "Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. But when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude, because they took him for a prophet." I also think this is a relevant scripture when looking at Daniel 2. There seems to be a distinction depending upon one's interaction with the stone. In one case, they fall on the stone and rest broken on it and in the other the stone falls on them and wrests existence from them. One brings brokenness and the other pulverization, much like the stone that strikes the statute. To me, the falling on the stone is akin to the Christian dying to self and being reborn in Christ. It is a the broken and contrite heart that fall on the stone and receive His rest. Psalm 34:15-19 "The eyes of the LORD [are] upon the righteous, and his ears [are open] unto their cry. The face of the LORD [is] against them that do evil, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth. [The righteous] cry, and the LORD heareth, and delivereth them out of all their troubles. The LORD [is] nigh unto them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit. Many [are] the afflictions of the righteous: but the LORD delivereth him out of them all." Psalm 51:15-17 "O Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall shew forth thy praise. For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give [it]: thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God [are] a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Matthew 11:28-30 "Come unto me, all [ye] that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke [is] easy, and my burden is light." But those who remain proud and stand in defiance, the stone will fall on them and grind them to powder. I can see the reasoning behind seeing the ultimate striking of the statue in the end times on this basis since the ultimate judgement is yet future. However, we must not forget the context of the vision itself. We agree that the metals represent sequential kingdoms of this world. While the kings of these kingdoms changed over time, the kingdom always had a king of sorts. I think it's important to also point out that while we know from other scripture and history that the belly and thighs represent Greece, the vision is not detailed about the division of the brass kingdom in four, yet Daniel 8 is. It defines the goat as the king of Greece and the four horns that come out of it before the Roman Empire represented by the legs. This hints to me at a less granular look at ruling political kingdoms that all happened to be wrapped up in ruling over Israel as the 6 heads did and the 7th and 8th will. It is interesting that Yeshua distinguished His kingdom many times from the kingdoms of this world. John 18:33-37 "Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice." There is a distinction between the image and the stone that destroys it. The image represents political power in the world while the stone represents the spiritual power of the kingdom of God that exists in the world, but is not of the world. The members of the kingdom aren't centered in a particular land, they exist in every land, within every earthly kingdom. The vision represents the physical kingdoms of men on the earth being defeated by the spiritual kingdom of God. In the context of God's design in blinding Israel and the Gospel going to the Gentiles, many would consider this time the church age.

A study of just the word altar in scripture was very interesting as I was studying the moedim. While in the context of the appointed times it had to do with the seven times of the year appointed by God for Israel during 3 main times of year centered around the harvest and communion with God. But it also means an appointed place, the tabernacle of the congregation, where they were to meet the Lord at His Earthly residence. If you look at the times scripture uses the word altar, it's many times tied to man building an altar upon which to make a sacrifice at the place where the Lord met with them or when they desired to meet with the Lord. This ultimately became more stationary in Jerusalem. It's interesting that the altar to be made for the Lord was not supposed to be hewn stone, it had to be stone naturally broken apart, or not cut with human hands. Exodus 20:25 "And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it." Yeshua is the stone cut without hands, unpolluted and the perfect sacrifice at the time God came as a man to tabernacle with men. He was the stone that brought the kingdom of God to the world and made a way for us to be members of that kingdom. I thought that was a pretty cool connection when I came across that doing word studies. And of course it goes into your next mention of the stone the builders rejected.

I would agree that the image should be examined without any attempt to modify or reinterpret its construction. It is in that line of thinking that I feel we should first fully interpret as much of the image as possible from the one vision we are given before attaching completely separate visions at different times that may very well be for very different purposes. Do you think by bringing in Daniel 7 and 8 to these four divisions there may be some assumptive connections being made? I realize you have an interpretation formed from study and this text is based on a more holistic study of the book of Daniel, which we will get to. I just wanted to make my point from the beginning of this conversation about not making assumptions from outside each vision until the full interpretation from within the vision is addressed. I know the count of 4 kings/kingdoms as seen in four metals (2), four beasts (7), and four horns (8) are tempting connections to make, but I also think individual examination of each vision in its own context defines where each sits on the prophetic timeline and there are more distinctions between each than the fact that each speak of four entities. Of course the visions of John compliment some of Daniel's and the historical record as a companion fill out the context, but I'm not sure your take and we'll get to that.

I debated how best to address my comments for a long post with long responses. I think in the interest of keeping the post shorter, I'll respond to the pieces in order, but separate posts just to delineate some of the points. There's a lot of thoughts on the topic.

I appreciate the way you are approaching the conversation and I had a similar experience when I began to focus on Bible prophecy. I actually began to be interested partially due to the Sumatra earthquake back in the end of 2004. I had never "studied" prophecy, but the extent of the devastation brought to mind Matthew 24:7. I then devoured Chuck Missler's Learn the Bible in 24 Hours, which was probably the first time the Bible stories I learned as a kid suddenly connected in my mind as a historical narrative and the prophetic injection to that narrative became clear. Sadly I was not very good about actually reading the Bible so 2005 was like a shock to reality for me. However, through all the teachings from Missler and others, I came to study on my own and found that some of the narratives spun didn't quite match what I was finding on my own. But I think it's important to learn from those more studious as we grow in understanding and not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are still many pieces of invaluable information I gained, yet the overall narrative I find to be in error. Even so, I'm not infallible and that's how I approach the narrative I put together as I continue to study God's Word. To that end, I appreciate the other perspectives. I rarely swallow them whole, but I can't count the number of times I found a piece of scriptural connection or information that I'd never seen. Revelation was my first book that I really dug into myself and I remember and took pictures of post-it notes laid out on my bed as I tried to organize my understanding of it. Not sure I'll ever fully get there till Yeshua walks us through it, if we really care at that point. But the wholistic narrative has certainly become more clear to me since then and I'm constantly in awe of the interconnectivity of the prophetic narrative woven through scripture here a little and there a little. It seems to me you are on the same path as I, learn but verify, Acts 17:11. I would agree that we know Rome is the next in line based on the historical narrative. I think it's important to recognize that the statue as a whole represent the kingdoms of this world in a series of metals that change with each kingdom. Looking forward to John's vision, we see the kingdoms of this world represented as a sequence of heads on the dragon that have fallen through time. What I also think is important to recognize generally is that the Old Testament is focused on God's relationship with Israel. The New Testament was focused first on God's relationship with those of Israel that would hear His voice, but then that voice turned from the blinded of Israel. The good news and understanding of the spiritual nature of God's kingdom in this world went to the Gentiles, and any of Israel with ears to hear, and continues to this day. But it is very clear that yet unfulfilled prophecy is focused almost exclusively again on Israel and her redemption from blindness into the light. Indeed it is only because of Israel that Nebuchadnezzar's dream is revealed to us through Daniel in captivity and God using Him to reveal prophetic truth to us. And so the statue representing the kingdoms of this world made of different metals through time has in common with the heads of John, the relationships of those kingdoms to the people of Israel. Indeed, Israel was judged through Babylon, returned through Medo-Persia, tried and foreshadowed through Greece and the Seleucid Empire and its little horn, and ruled over by Rome that consumed the kingdom before it and both ruled over Jerusalem at the time of Christ, and literally paved the roads that would carry the Gospel to the world. See, a way of looking at the iron and clay that I had not considered before! Thinking through it, there is a kind of inability to cleave in the idea of how we are to be separate from the world even though we are in it and should not be partakers in their sin. John 17:14-19 "I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth." While the feet and not the toes are mentioned in Daniel 2:43 as being iron mixed with clay, Daniel 2:42 in the interpretation states that the toes of the feet are also part iron and clay. To me, this connects the two together as both being composed of the same mix of iron and clay. That this mixing of iron and clay is in the feet and toes of the statue, given that all the metals before it were representative of sequential nations through time, would seem to indicate a possible 5th kingdom except the fact that it is made partly of Iron, the same metal before that was not weak, and Daniel 2:40-44 speaks of the fourth kingdom as including the legs and the feet in its interpretation. So just in reading within this prophetic vision itself, it would seem that the legs, feet, and toes are all the fourth kingdom and it is at the end of the existence of this fourth kingdom that it becomes weak, with iron and clay mixing and making it weaker. The idea of God's chosen people being the clay that slowly weakened the Roman empire at its end would also seem to fit with the idea that the stone cut without hands that strikes the statue would overcome all these previous kingdoms and grow to fill the whole earth. However, would you consider the clay as part of the statue as well, being mixed with the iron? It seems to me that the clay mixed with the iron is part of the very statue that the stone strikes, it's nature being a weakened version of the fourth kingdom. I think there is a very important element of verse 35 that is relevant to this idea. Daniel 2:35 "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." If the clay represents the chosen of God, then we see the stone cut without hands breaking both the iron and clay together and they, along with the statue as a whole blow away like chaff and are carried away that no place is found for them. This seems to me to be pretty clear language that the statue as a whole, including the clay cease to exist in any meaningful way. This seems more representative of the clay being part of the statue, and therefore the kingdom of this world, that is forever done away with and replaced by the kingdom of God. So to me the question would seem to be, at what point in history does this elimination of the statue and all of its metals take place? I agree the stone that struck and destroyed the image represents Yeshua. When was the kingdom of God established? Daniel 2:44 "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 [the kingdom set up] shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever." What kings exist in the days that God sets up a kingdom that will never be destroyed? Since the stone cut without hands strikes the feet in their weakened state representing the end of the once strong kingdom of Rome, we should be able to find in scripture the establishing the kingdom of God, or the kingdom of heaven, toward the end of the Roman Empire that eventually consumes it. Ultimately the stone representing the establishment of the kingdom that grows to a mountain filling the whole earth. While the stone is Christ, it would also seem to be the kingdom He heads, given that the interpretation of the stone is a kingdom. Furthermore, if the image represents the kingdoms of this world and the stone striking the image represents the kingdom of God destroying the kingdoms of this world and growing into a mountain that fills the whole earth, are there similar depictions regarding the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven that similarly speak to a kingdom that cannot be defeated by this world growing from something small to very large? What are your thoughts on this?