Who is the Little Horn of Daniel 8? Can this be linked with the Little Horn in Daniel 7?

[Diaste]

10 hours ago, adamjedgar said:

Now just to help with the understanding of the claim the name "rome" isnt mentioned...i would urge you to use some common sense here and read your history (as even secular history agrees with the bible on the nations that ruled the world after Babylon). It is a straw man argument to claim Rome isnt mentioned!

"You, O king, are the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given sovereignty, power, strength, and glory. 38Wherever the sons of men or beasts of the field or birds of the air dwell, He has given them into your hand and has made you ruler over them all. You are that head of gold." Dan 2

"The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia. 21The shaggy goat represents the king of Greece,b and the large horn between his eyes is the first king. " Dan 8

"It's pretty easy to see the statute represents the mentioned kingdoms beginning with Nebuchadnezzar. We know in fact from Daniel 5 the Kingdom was given to the Medes and Persians. From Dan 8 we know the Medes and Persians were defeated by the shaggy goat of Greece. But Rome???

Old Testament Search

Search results for: rome
 

No results found.

How is Rome mentioned in Daniel? It isn't. I know the world history argument, the ruling over Israel argument, the ruling over the world argument, et.al.

But what does Daniel say about the successor to Greece? God tells us who the successor is:

"Thus the goat became very great, but at the height of his power, his large horn was broken off, and four prominent horns came up in its place, pointing toward the four winds of heaven." Dan 8

"The shaggy goat represents the king of Greece, and the large horn between his eyes is the first king. 22The four horns that replaced the broken one represent four kingdoms that will rise from that nation, but will not have the same power." Dan 8

I don't think there is a dispute as to whom the large horn represents, Alexander the Great. The successor to the large horn is the four horns as above. Gabriel explains the four horns represent four kingdoms that arise from the kingdom of Alexander. None of those four were Rome. 

So then if we agree the statue of Dan 2 is Golden Babylon [Nebuchadnezzar], Silver Medo-Persia, and Bronze Greece then the successor to Greece in the legs and feet of Iron can only be the one mentioned by Gabriel and that is the four horns that arise after the great horn is broken. Rome did not rise from Greece. Asia Minor, Egypt, Macedonia and the Seleucid Empire all did. These four replaced Greece; a well-documented historical fact. 

Then if we avail ourselves of the world domination argument but stay within the bounds of the interpretation of the prophecy by Gabriel we do see a world dominator arise from one of the four that replaced Greece, Islam. 

Now if we hear Gabriel and take a single step further, we see "In the latter part of their reign, when the rebellion has reached its full measure, an insolent king, skilled in intrigue, will come to the throne. " Dan 8

This insolent king arises from the end part of 'their reign'. That could only be the end part of the reign of the four horns that replaced the Grecian Empire. Interesting to note that Turkey, Greece, Egypt and the Mesopotamian powers still reign while Rome is long dead. 

I don't think the connection from Rome to the church is valid either. If the argument starts out with the civil and military Roman Empire is the fulfillment of the legs of Iron then it should remain so. Switching directions midstream to a religious Rome when confronted with the undesirable evidence of a dead Roman Empire is futility.

 

 

[luigi]

On 12/8/2021 at 1:33 AM, adamjedgar said:

I thought that rather than state my position, i would simply start with an abstract from a paper written by Ville Suutarinen where he makes the case that in Daniel 8 "it is more probable that the little horn comes from one of the four winds (the northern wind) than one of the four horns" (btw at present i do not personally hold this position)

Ville Suutarinen

• Newbold College of Higher Education

 

 

The Little Horn in Daniel 8: The defense of Historicism

November 2018, August 2019

The identity of the little horn power in Daniel 8 (and 7) is largely determined by the method of interpretation of that chapter, the book of Daniel as a whole, apocalyptic prophecies, and the entire Bible. The Maccabean thesis, which is built on preteristic interpretation method, believes that the little horn corresponds for a Seleucid king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who stood against the Jews in the second century BCE. There is also a view, that claims that the little horn in Daniel 7 is not the same little horn as in Daniel 8, as André Reis argues (André Reis, “A Response to Glifford Goldstein on the Little Horn on Daniel 8,” ResearchGate, April, 2018, accessed August 18, 2019, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324758761_A_RESPONSE_TO_CLIFFORD_GOLDSTEIN_ON_THE_LITTLE_HORN_OF_DANIEL_8.). However, this interpretation has many problems. For example, it breaks the unity and apocalyptic-universal and end-time characteristics of the book of Daniel. Historicism, on the other hand, stands on these characteristics. As a matter of fact, the principles of Protestant biblical hermeneutics point to the direction of historicism, as will be shown when textual, lexical, and theological areas are researched. The goal of this paper is to bring the following contributions: It establishes a chiastic structure for Daniel 7-12, which thematic peaks are Christ and the Day of Atonement. It offers answers for André Reis' grammatical, lexical, textual, and theological arguments for Antiochus Epiphanes being the little horn in Daniel 8. It shows that when the little horn continues the philosophical and spiritual legacy or continuum of the king of the north, it establishes the little horn's coming from the cardinal point of north, without the little horn needing to come from one of the four horns of the goat. The thesis statement: This research argues that Antiochus IV Epiphanes cannot be the little horn of Daniel 7 and/or 8 because: (1) The historicist view for the origin of the little horn is the most probable; (2) Epiphanes was not great enough and the preeminent in the land for the proportions of the little horn, but Rome was preeminent in its imperial stage, and was and is preeminent in its papal stage; (3) the time prophecies of Daniel do not fit into the reign of this Seleucid king; (4) Epiphanes did not rise at the latter period of the Seleucid kingdom; (5) the book of Daniel is mainly a universal book, and Christocentric interpretation model leads to that conclusion; (6) because the book is universal in scope, the little horn grants universal proportions, which are also seen in history; (7) it is more probable that the little horn comes from one of the four winds (the northern wind) than one of the four horns, because the little horn continues the philosophical and spiritual legacy or continuum of the king of the north; and (8) the “abomination of desolation”, ultimately, has a spiritual and end-time meaning, which is fulfilled in history. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335229819_The_Little_Horn_in_Daniel_8_In_Defense_of_Historicism
 

The little horn in Daniel 7 is also referred to as the 10 horned beasts mouth who speaks great things. This little horn is the same mouth who speaks great things in association with the beast in Revelation 13:5. The little horn in Daniel 7 is therefore during the end times. Now look at the little horn in Daniel 8. According to the angel Gabriel, the events shown Daniel regarding the little horn and other events in Daniel 8, are to occur during the end times (Daniel 8:17 & 19). 

Daniel 8:17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.

Daniel 8:19 And he said, Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the last end of the indignation: for at the time appointed the end shall be.

[adamjedgar]

13 hours ago, Diaste said:

"You, O king, are the king of kings, to whom the God of heaven has given sovereignty, power, strength, and glory. 38Wherever the sons of men or beasts of the field or birds of the air dwell, He has given them into your hand and has made you ruler over them all. You are that head of gold." Dan 2

"The two-horned ram that you saw represents the kings of Media and Persia. 21The shaggy goat represents the king of Greece,b and the large horn between his eyes is the first king. " Dan 8

"It's pretty easy to see the statute represents the mentioned kingdoms beginning with Nebuchadnezzar. We know in fact from Daniel 5 the Kingdom was given to the Medes and Persians. From Dan 8 we know the Medes and Persians were defeated by the shaggy goat of Greece. But Rome???

Old Testament Search

Search results for: rome
 

No results found.

How is Rome mentioned in Daniel? It isn't. I know the world history argument, the ruling over Israel argument, the ruling over the world argument, et.al.

But what does Daniel say about the successor to Greece? God tells us who the successor is:

"Thus the goat became very great, but at the height of his power, his large horn was broken off, and four prominent horns came up in its place, pointing toward the four winds of heaven." Dan 8

"The shaggy goat represents the king of Greece, and the large horn between his eyes is the first king. 22The four horns that replaced the broken one represent four kingdoms that will rise from that nation, but will not have the same power." Dan 8

I don't think there is a dispute as to whom the large horn represents, Alexander the Great. The successor to the large horn is the four horns as above. Gabriel explains the four horns represent four kingdoms that arise from the kingdom of Alexander. None of those four were Rome. 

So then if we agree the statue of Dan 2 is Golden Babylon [Nebuchadnezzar], Silver Medo-Persia, and Bronze Greece then the successor to Greece in the legs and feet of Iron can only be the one mentioned by Gabriel and that is the four horns that arise after the great horn is broken. Rome did not rise from Greece. Asia Minor, Egypt, Macedonia and the Seleucid Empire all did. These four replaced Greece; a well-documented historical fact. 

Then if we avail ourselves of the world domination argument but stay within the bounds of the interpretation of the prophecy by Gabriel we do see a world dominator arise from one of the four that replaced Greece, Islam. 

Now if we hear Gabriel and take a single step further, we see "In the latter part of their reign, when the rebellion has reached its full measure, an insolent king, skilled in intrigue, will come to the throne. " Dan 8

This insolent king arises from the end part of 'their reign'. That could only be the end part of the reign of the four horns that replaced the Grecian Empire. Interesting to note that Turkey, Greece, Egypt and the Mesopotamian powers still reign while Rome is long dead. 

I don't think the connection from Rome to the church is valid either. If the argument starts out with the civil and military Roman Empire is the fulfillment of the legs of Iron then it should remain so. Switching directions midstream to a religious Rome when confronted with the undesirable evidence of a dead Roman Empire is futility.

 

 

"Rome was not an empire until after Greece"...your statement there that Rome was long dead is historically false. No historian I know of agrees with that statement. You have your history wrong.

Second, the Seluecid empire was a GREEK empire...it is not a unique entity. If you read your history you will quickly realise that to be true, however, for the sake of this comment i will post reference for this...

The Seleucid Empire was founded by Seleucus I Nicator, following the division of the Macedonian Empire that existed previously, which had been founded by Alexander the Great. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seleucid_Empire

 

Now your statement that Rome is not mentioned is also fundamentally flawed...we know that these kingdoms are true by more than just the words (Medo-Persia or Greece...because Babylon is also not directly named...only that the man, "Nebuchadnezzar himself", is the head of Gold).

 

The reasons that almost all scholars know for certain that Rome is the fourth kingdom are because:

1. the most obvious is world history of course (Rome is absolutely the next world empire after Greece)

2. The Romans deified Alexander the Great...exactly as prophesied they would (roman emporers visited his grave, pompey attempted to style himself after Alexander even to the point of obtaining the identical method of dress, Romans followed his style of military tactics etc

3. The kingdoms very much followed the trend of the value vs strength of the metals associated with the statue in Daniel 2 (even down to the kingdoms of mixed iron and clay). You see history tells us that Babylon was an exceedingly rich kingdom...the city shone like gold, it was a glorious city to behold, we also know that Rome was absolutely a kingdom of Iron exactly as shown in the statue. Strangely enough, Rome struggled with its financing for most of its time in power...contrasting the riches of the Babylonian empire.

4. when we also compare the statue in Daniel 2 with further revelation given to Daniel in chapters 7 and 8 etc, it is very clear what kingdoms are being represented in Daniel 2. Clearly the fourth is 100% Rome. It might pay for you to move across into new testament study in parallel with Daniel 2 so that you dont get led up the garden path with the statement, Rome isnt mentioned in Daniel 2. That is the same line of thinking that JW's use to say "show me the word trinity in the bible"! Its a deeply flawed argument.

Edited December 10, 2021 by adamjedgar

[The Light]

On 12/8/2021 at 6:18 PM, Charlie744 said:

Marilyn, if you do not mind, does your answer address:

1) who or where the 'little horn' will be and come from? or,

2) who or where the AC will be and come from? or,

3) are they the same entity perhaps?

Thanks, Charlie

The little horn and the antichrist are the same person. Scriptures in Rev 17 and Isaiah 14 identify that person.

[The Light]

On 12/8/2021 at 11:28 PM, adamjedgar said:

I see an immediate problem here...Assyria is not north of the holy land...it is east. I dont think that fits the illustration given. My understanding is that Assyria has never had its home territory to the North even though it may have extended that far, it also extended south to Egypt. Am i wrong on this?

 

Assyria (/əˈsɪriə/) (Akkadian: ??, Classical Syriac: ܐܬܘܪ‎ or ܐܫܘܪ), also at times called the Assyrian Empire, was a Mesopotamian kingdom and empire of the Ancient Near East that existed as a state from perhaps as early as the 25th century BC (in the form of the Assur city-state^[4]) until its collapse between 612 BC and 605 BC, thereby spanning the periods of the Early to Middle Bronze Age through to the late Iron Age.

You are correct. There is a problem. The little horn is the antichrist, but he is not a king of the north. We can prove that using scripture.

Dan 11

45 And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

Dan 12

12 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

Seems that this king of the north comes to his end just before the great tribulation.

The king of the north is the 7th king, the rider on the white horse. The antichrist is the eighth king who is of the 7.

[JoeCanada]

16 hours ago, adamjedgar said:

 

 

The reasons that almost all scholars know for certain that Rome is the fourth kingdom are because:

1. the most obvious is world history of course (Rome is absolutely the next world empire after Greece)

2. The Romans deified Alexander the Great...exactly as prophesied they would (roman emporers visited his grave, pompey attempted to style himself after Alexander even to the point of obtaining the identical method of dress, Romans followed his style of military tactics etc

3. The kingdoms very much followed the trend of the value vs strength of the metals associated with the statue in Daniel 2 (even down to the kingdoms of mixed iron and clay). You see history tells us that Babylon was an exceedingly rich kingdom...the city shone like gold, it was a glorious city to behold, we also know that Rome was absolutely a kingdom of Iron exactly as shown in the statue. Strangely enough, Rome struggled with its financing for most of its time in power...contrasting the riches of the Babylonian empire.

4. when we also compare the statue in Daniel 2 with further revelation given to Daniel in chapters 7 and 8 etc, it is very clear what kingdoms are being represented in Daniel 2. Clearly the fourth is 100% Rome. It might pay for you to move across into new testament study in parallel with Daniel 2 so that you dont get led up the garden path with the statement, Rome isnt mentioned in Daniel 2. That is the same line of thinking that JW's use to say "show me the word trinity in the bible"! Its a deeply flawed argument.

Hi adamjedgar,

".... when we also compare the statue in Daniel 2 with further revelation given to Daniel in chapters 7 and 8 etc, it is very clear what kingdoms are being represented in Daniel 2. Clearly the fourth is 100% Rome."

I disagree.

Let's look at Dan 2:39 + 40 .....

"After you there will arise another kingdom inferior to you, then another third kingdom of bronze, which will rule over all the earth"....Dan 2:39

"THEN there will be a fourth kingdom as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron crushes and shatters all things, so, like iron that breaks in pieces, it will crush and break all these in pieces...." Dan 2:40

The statue in Dan 2 was God's communication to Nebuchadnezzar of the kingdoms that would reign over Babylon after him. 

Rome clearly would never and did never rule over Babylon. Dan 2:40 makes it clear that the fourth kingdom will crush and break "all these"... (the other three kingdoms) into bits and crush them. Rome did not do this to either Babylon or Persia. 

 Rome did not "crush and break into pieces" any kingdom that it captured and controlled. It did the opposite. It adopted languages, architecture, customs and  gods. The Greek gods were adopted by Rome and their names were changed. The Greek architecture was copied by Rome in their buildings. 

Like you stated...."" The Romans deified Alexander the Great...exactly as prophesied they would (roman emporers visited his grave, pompey attempted to style himself after Alexander even to the point of obtaining the identical method of dress, Romans followed his style of military tactics etc"

The very opposite of what scripture declares in Dan 2:40........ It states that the fourth kingdom  devours, crushes, tramples and breaks any kingdom that it captures. It does not adopt anything..... it destroys. It changes languages, calendars, customs. It destroys buildings and temples. This is Islam! Everyone becomes a slave to Islam..... or they die!

 

"Then there will be a fourth kingdom as strong as iron; inasmuch as iron crushes and shatters all things, so, like iron that breaks in pieces, it will crush and break all these in pieces"... Dan 2:40

" A fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet; and it was different from all the beasts before it, and it had ten horns"...Dan 7:7

" I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns....." Rev 13:1

This is clearly talking about Islam.... not Rome. Islam is both the fourth beast from Daniel  and the beast from Revelation, the Antichrist!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[DeighAnn]

21 minutes ago, JoeCanada said:

Hi adamjedgar,

".... when we also compare the statue in Daniel 2 with further revelation given to Daniel in chapters 7 and 8 etc, it is very clear what kingdoms are being represented in Daniel 2. Clearly the fourth is 100% Rome."

I disagree.

Let's look at Dan 2:39 + 40 .....

"After you there will arise another kingdom inferior to you, then another third kingdom of bronze, which will rule over all the earth"....Dan 2:39

"THEN there will be a fourth kingdom as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron crushes and shatters all things, so, like iron that breaks in pieces, it will crush and break all these in pieces...." Dan 2:40

The statue in Dan 2 was God's communication to Nebuchadnezzar of the kingdoms that would reign over Babylon after him. 

Rome clearly would never and did never rule over Babylon. Dan 2:40 makes it clear that the fourth kingdom will crush and break "all these"... (the other three kingdoms) into bits and crush them. Rome did not do this to either Babylon or Persia. 

 Rome did not "crush and break into pieces" any kingdom that it captured and controlled. It did the opposite. It adopted languages, architecture, customs and  gods. The Greek gods were adopted by Rome and their names were changed. The Greek architecture was copied by Rome in their buildings. 

Like you stated...."" The Romans deified Alexander the Great...exactly as prophesied they would (roman emporers visited his grave, pompey attempted to style himself after Alexander even to the point of obtaining the identical method of dress, Romans followed his style of military tactics etc"

The very opposite of what scripture declares in Dan 2:40........ It states that the fourth kingdom  devours, crushes, tramples and breaks any kingdom that it captures. It does not adopt anything..... it destroys. It changes languages, calendars, customs. It destroys buildings and temples. This is Islam! Everyone becomes a slave to Islam..... or they die!

 

"Then there will be a fourth kingdom as strong as iron; inasmuch as iron crushes and shatters all things, so, like iron that breaks in pieces, it will crush and break all these in pieces"... Dan 2:40

" A fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet; and it was different from all the beasts before it, and it had ten horns"...Dan 7:7

" I saw a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns....." Rev 13:1

This is clearly talking about Islam.... not Rome. Islam is both the fourth beast from Daniel  and the beast from Revelation, the Antichrist!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Joe, 

You wrote
"The statue in Dan 2 was God's communication to Nebuchadnezzar of the kingdoms that would reign over Babylon after him".

Where did the idea that it would be over Babylon?

For me, there is ONE place to which the rest of the world looks, and that is Jerusalem and so as I see it, to rule the world it is not Babylon that must be under control,  but Jerusalem.  So that would include Rome.  

Thank you 
 

[JoeCanada]

16 minutes ago, DeighAnn said:

Hi Joe, 

You wrote
"The statue in Dan 2 was God's communication to Nebuchadnezzar of the kingdoms that would reign over Babylon after him".

Where did the idea that it would be over Babylon?

For me, there is ONE place to which the rest of the world looks, and that is Jerusalem and so as I see it, to rule the world it is not Babylon that must be under control,  but Jerusalem.  So that would include Rome.  

Thank you 
 

Hey DA,

Well, King Neb was the greatest king of the Chaldean dynasty of Babylonia. 

The dream he had of the statue made of four metals started from his reign.. "you O King are the head of gold". Of the seven kingdoms from Rev 17, two - Egypt and Assyria-  existed previous to Babylon and weren't part of the statue in Neb's dream, since only the additional kingdoms which followed Babylon are included in the dream. 

That's why Rome, which never conquered Babylon and only held it briefly for about a year, wasn't intended to be included for that reason. 

The fourth kingdom of Neb's statue is equivalent to the beast of Revelation and Daniel's fourth terrifying beast. 

Rome is disqualified from being the fourth kingdom of Daniel.

 

[DeighAnn]

14 minutes ago, JoeCanada said:

Hey DA,

Well, King Neb was the greatest king of the Chaldean dynasty of Babylonia. 

The dream he had of the statue made of four metals started from his reign.. "you O King are the head of gold". Of the seven kingdoms from Rev 17, two - Egypt and Assyria-  existed previous to Babylon and weren't part of the statue in Neb's dream, since only the additional kingdoms which followed Babylon are included in the dream. 

That's why Rome, which never conquered Babylon and only held it briefly for about a year, wasn't intended to be included for that reason. 

The fourth kingdom of Neb's statue is equivalent to the beast of Revelation and Daniel's fourth terrifying beast. 

Rome is disqualified from being the fourth kingdom of Daniel.

 

Are you saying you believe that islam will conquer the whole world?

[DeighAnn]

15 minutes ago, JoeCanada said:

Hey DA,

Well, King Neb was the greatest king of the Chaldean dynasty of Babylonia. 

The dream he had of the statue made of four metals started from his reign.. "you O King are the head of gold". Of the seven kingdoms from Rev 17, two - Egypt and Assyria-  existed previous to Babylon and weren't part of the statue in Neb's dream, since only the additional kingdoms which followed Babylon are included in the dream. 

That's why Rome, which never conquered Babylon and only held it briefly for about a year, wasn't intended to be included for that reason. 

The fourth kingdom of Neb's statue is equivalent to the beast of Revelation and Daniel's fourth terrifying beast. 

Rome is disqualified from being the fourth kingdom of Daniel.

 

Hi Joe

I went back and put the two together and came up with this.  Is it at all similar to what you are saying?

 

Daniel 7:3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.
 

Daniel 2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

Daniel 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.

Daniel 7:4 The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
____________________________________________________________-

Daniel 2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee..., 

Daniel 7:5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.

________________________________________________________________

...and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.

Daniel 7:6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.

______________________________________________________________

ROME WAS THE LAST KINGDOM TO 'RULE THE WORLD' SO TO SPEAK

Daniel 2:40 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.

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.

Are you saying these 10 horns are the 'tie-in' to Satans being cast to earth to rule for an hour?

________________________________________________________________

BECAUSE I BELIEVE THIS TO BE SATANS ARRIVAL UPON THE EARTH

WITH THE FALLEN ANGELS BEING THE IRON

AND THE BODY OF CHRIST BEING THE CLAY - miry 

Daniel 2:41 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.

Satan cast to earth

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 2:43 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.

AS IN THE DAYS OF NOE

Daniel 7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before 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.

REMINDING US OF THE KINGDOM THAT SATAN ONCE RULED 
Revelation 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.

Revelation 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

 

AND COMETH THE LORDS DAY  and this all follows Revelation

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 shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Daniel 7:9 I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.

Daniel 7:10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him the judgment was set, and the books were opened.

Daniel 7:11 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.

Daniel 7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.


Please critique and correct, if you wouldn't mind.  Threw it together real quick so IT IS A STUDY, NOT A FIRM BELIEF...just seeking here.....d