Shilohsfoal Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 20, 2023 Daniel 2:39 After you, another kingdom will arise, inferior to yours. Next, a third kingdom, one of bronze, will rule over the whole earth. Time and time again I see where people interpret the inferior kingdom in Daniel 2:39 as the Persian empire but I've never understand why they believe it is inferior to the Babylonian empire. From what I've read,the Persian empire was much larger and lasted longer than the Babylonian empire.The Persians even conquered the Babylonians with ease. So,how is the Persian empire inferior to the Babylonian empire? Babylonian empire Persian empire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montana Marv Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 3,135 Content Per Day: 0.69 Reputation: 1,091 Days Won: 2 Joined: 11/03/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted November 20, 2023 Because they are below the head of gold. In Christ Montana Marv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilohsfoal Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Author Share Posted November 20, 2023 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Montana Marv said: Because they are below the head of gold. In Christ Montana Marv A kingdom is below the head of gold but I'm not sure it's the Persian empire that is below it. Seeing the Persian empire ruled the Babylonian empire,id say it was over it.Not below it. How do you come to the conclusion thag the Persian empire is below the Babylonian empire? How is it inferior? Would you also say the Grecian empire is also inferior to both the Babylonian and Persian empire because you believe it too is below the Babylonian empire? Edited November 20, 2023 by Shilohsfoal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie744 Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 54 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,667 Content Per Day: 1.72 Reputation: 857 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/29/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted November 20, 2023 33 minutes ago, Shilohsfoal said: Daniel 2:39 After you, another kingdom will arise, inferior to yours. Next, a third kingdom, one of bronze, will rule over the whole earth. Time and time again I see where people interpret the inferior kingdom in Daniel 2:39 as the Persian empire but I've never understand why they believe it is inferior to the Babylonian empire. From what I've read,the Persian empire was much larger and lasted longer than the Babylonian empire.The Persians even conquered the Babylonians with ease. So,how is the Persian empire inferior to the Babylonian empire? Babylonian empire Persian empire First, you have the remember there are two seemingly conflicting prophecies- that only God could design and fulfill. He prophesied in Isaiah some 150 years befor the birth of Daniel or Cyrus or even the time of the Persian Empire, that Cyrus would allow the Jews to return to Jerusalem. Babylon would be conquered by Cyrus. However, in Daniel, the chapter 2 prophecy for the 2nd kingdom was VERY brief and stated the 2nd kingdom would be another kingdom “inferior” to yours… How could a power like Babylon behind the most impenetrable walls be conquered by an “inferior” kingdom? Notice the type of metal ( silver) is never mentioned in verse 39 because it is not a metal used in warfare (too soft). So, the two seemingly conflicting prophecies can only be accomplished: Cyrus, head of the Persian kingdom would conquer Babylon, although the inferior part of the Medes-Persian kingdom (the Medes) would be given to rule over Babylon by Cyrus. Darius, the older king of the Medes was given Babylon to rule until his death two years later. Then , Cyrus would reign over Babylon and allow the Jews to return to Jerusalem. Only God could have deigned this and made it happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael37 Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Servant Followers: 21 Topic Count: 241 Topics Per Day: 0.11 Content Count: 6,952 Content Per Day: 3.27 Reputation: 4,870 Days Won: 2 Joined: 07/05/2018 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/23/1954 Share Posted November 20, 2023 5 hours ago, Shilohsfoal said: From what I've read, the Persian empire was much larger and lasted longer than the Babylonian empire. Why would those be the criteria? Surely military performance is the main standard. Quote from Albert Barnes Commentary Regarding Persia: (4) The kingdom was inferior by the gradual weakening of its power from internal causes. It was not only defeated in its attempts to invade others, and weakened by the degeneracy of the court and people, but, as a natural consequence, by the gradual lessening of the power of the central government, and the growing independence of the provinces. From the time of Darius Nothus (423 b.c.) - a weak, effeminate, and indolent prince - “the satraps of the distant provinces paid only a nominal obedience to the king. Many of them were, in fact, sovereigns over the countries over which they presided, and carried on wars against each other.” - Lyman. It was from causes such as these that the power of the kingdom became gradually weakened, and that the way was prepared for the easy conquests of Alexander the Great. Their successive defeats, and this gradual degeneracy and weakening of the kingdom, show the propriety of the description given of the kingdom in the vision and the interpretation - that it would be an “inferior kingdom,” a kingdom which, in comparison with that of Babylon, might be compared with silver as compared with gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilohsfoal Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Author Share Posted November 20, 2023 (edited) 4 hours ago, Michael37 said: Why would those be the criteria? Surely military performance is the main standard. Quote from Albert Barnes Commentary Regarding Persia: (4) The kingdom was inferior by the gradual weakening of its power from internal causes. It was not only defeated in its attempts to invade others, and weakened by the degeneracy of the court and people, but, as a natural consequence, by the gradual lessening of the power of the central government, and the growing independence of the provinces. From the time of Darius Nothus (423 b.c.) - a weak, effeminate, and indolent prince - “the satraps of the distant provinces paid only a nominal obedience to the king. Many of them were, in fact, sovereigns over the countries over which they presided, and carried on wars against each other.” - Lyman. It was from causes such as these that the power of the kingdom became gradually weakened, and that the way was prepared for the easy conquests of Alexander the Great. Their successive defeats, and this gradual degeneracy and weakening of the kingdom, show the propriety of the description given of the kingdom in the vision and the interpretation - that it would be an “inferior kingdom,” a kingdom which, in comparison with that of Babylon, might be compared with silver as compared with gold. I don't think I could consider Babylons military performance to be greater the the military that conquered it in one day.Babylons military never stood a chance against the Persian military. Im not saying that the Grecian military wasn't stronger than Persian but the Persian military was by far greater than the Babylonian. The Babylonian military loosing it's kingdom in one night is a very poor performance of military strength. Edited November 20, 2023 by Shilohsfoal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilohsfoal Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Author Share Posted November 20, 2023 (edited) 9 hours ago, Charlie744 said: First, you have the remember there are two seemingly conflicting prophecies- that only God could design and fulfill. He prophesied in Isaiah some 150 years befor the birth of Daniel or Cyrus or even the time of the Persian Empire, that Cyrus would allow the Jews to return to Jerusalem. Babylon would be conquered by Cyrus. However, in Daniel, the chapter 2 prophecy for the 2nd kingdom was VERY brief and stated the 2nd kingdom would be another kingdom “inferior” to yours… How could a power like Babylon behind the most impenetrable walls be conquered by an “inferior” kingdom? Notice the type of metal ( silver) is never mentioned in verse 39 because it is not a metal used in warfare (too soft). So, the two seemingly conflicting prophecies can only be accomplished: Cyrus, head of the Persian kingdom would conquer Babylon, although the inferior part of the Medes-Persian kingdom (the Medes) would be given to rule over Babylon by Cyrus. Darius, the older king of the Medes was given Babylon to rule until his death two years later. Then , Cyrus would reign over Babylon and allow the Jews to return to Jerusalem. Only God could have deigned this and made it happen. The Persian empire was by far greater than the Babylonian empire.The scripture it talking about the kingdom being inferior ,not the king. another kingdom will arise, inferior to yours Edited November 20, 2023 by Shilohsfoal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael37 Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Servant Followers: 21 Topic Count: 241 Topics Per Day: 0.11 Content Count: 6,952 Content Per Day: 3.27 Reputation: 4,870 Days Won: 2 Joined: 07/05/2018 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/23/1954 Share Posted November 20, 2023 12 minutes ago, Shilohsfoal said: Im not saying that the Grecian military wasn't stronger than Persian but the Persian military was by far greater than the Babylonian. Not according to these incidents: Again, Quotation from the Albert Barnes Commentary Regarding Post-Babylonian Persia: (2) The kingdom was inferior in reference to the remarkable “defeats” in the military campaigns which were undertaken. The Assyrian or Babylonian empire was distinguished for the victories by which it carried its arms around the then known world. The Medo-Persian empire, after the reign of Cyrus, was almost as remarkable for the succession of defeats which have made the period of the world during which the empire continued, so well known in history. It is probable that no kingdom ever undertook so many foolish projects in reference to the conquests of other nations - projects so unwisely planned, and that resulted in so signal failures. The successor of Cyrus, Cambyses, invaded Egypt, and his conduct there in carrying on the war was such as to make him be regarded as a madman. Enraged against the Ethiopians for an answer which they gave him when, under pretence of friendship, he sent spies to examine their country, he resolved to invade their territory. Having come to Thebes, in Upper Egypt, he detached from his army fifty thousand men to go against the Hammonians, with orders to destroy their country, and to burn the temple of Jupiter Hammon that stood in it. After marching a few days in the desert, they were overwhelmed in the sands by a strong south wind, and all perished. Meantime Cambyses marched with the rest of his army against the Ethiopians, though he wanted all the means of subsistence for his army, until, having devoured all their beasts of burden, they were constrained to designate every tenth man of the army to be killed and eaten. In these deplorable circumstances, Cambyses returned to Thebes, having lost a great part of his army in this wild expedition. - Prideaux’s “Con.” i. 328. It was also during the continuance of this kingdom, that the ill-starred expeditions to Greece occurred, when Mardonius and Xerxes poured the million of Asia on the countries of Greece, and met such signal overthrows at Platea, Marathon, and Salamis. Such a series of disasters never before had occurred to invading armies, or made those who repelled invasion so illustrious. In this respect there was an evident propriety in speaking of this as an inferior or degenerate kingdom. (3) It was inferior in respect to the growing degeneracy and effeminacy of character and morals. From the time of Xerxes (479 b.c.) “symptoms of decay and corruption were manifest in the empire; the national character gradually degenerated; the citizens were corrupted and enfeebled by luxury; and confided more in mercenary troops than in native valor and fidelity. The kings submitted to the control of their wives, or the creatures whom they raised to posts of distinction; and the satraps, from being civil functionaries, began to usurp military authority.” - Lyman, “Hist. Chart.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilohsfoal Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 153 Topics Per Day: 0.06 Content Count: 5,881 Content Per Day: 2.47 Reputation: 330 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/22/2017 Status: Offline Author Share Posted November 20, 2023 (edited) 44 minutes ago, Michael37 said: Not according to these incidents: Again, Quotation from the Albert Barnes Commentary Regarding Post-Babylonian Persia: (2) The kingdom was inferior in reference to the remarkable “defeats” in the military campaigns which were undertaken. The Assyrian or Babylonian empire was distinguished for the victories by which it carried its arms around the then known world. The Medo-Persian empire, after the reign of Cyrus, was almost as remarkable for the succession of defeats which have made the period of the world during which the empire continued, so well known in history. It is probable that no kingdom ever undertook so many foolish projects in reference to the conquests of other nations - projects so unwisely planned, and that resulted in so signal failures. The successor of Cyrus, Cambyses, invaded Egypt, and his conduct there in carrying on the war was such as to make him be regarded as a madman. Enraged against the Ethiopians for an answer which they gave him when, under pretence of friendship, he sent spies to examine their country, he resolved to invade their territory. Having come to Thebes, in Upper Egypt, he detached from his army fifty thousand men to go against the Hammonians, with orders to destroy their country, and to burn the temple of Jupiter Hammon that stood in it. After marching a few days in the desert, they were overwhelmed in the sands by a strong south wind, and all perished. Meantime Cambyses marched with the rest of his army against the Ethiopians, though he wanted all the means of subsistence for his army, until, having devoured all their beasts of burden, they were constrained to designate every tenth man of the army to be killed and eaten. In these deplorable circumstances, Cambyses returned to Thebes, having lost a great part of his army in this wild expedition. - Prideaux’s “Con.” i. 328. It was also during the continuance of this kingdom, that the ill-starred expeditions to Greece occurred, when Mardonius and Xerxes poured the million of Asia on the countries of Greece, and met such signal overthrows at Platea, Marathon, and Salamis. Such a series of disasters never before had occurred to invading armies, or made those who repelled invasion so illustrious. In this respect there was an evident propriety in speaking of this as an inferior or degenerate kingdom. (3) It was inferior in respect to the growing degeneracy and effeminacy of character and morals. From the time of Xerxes (479 b.c.) “symptoms of decay and corruption were manifest in the empire; the national character gradually degenerated; the citizens were corrupted and enfeebled by luxury; and confided more in mercenary troops than in native valor and fidelity. The kings submitted to the control of their wives, or the creatures whom they raised to posts of distinction; and the satraps, from being civil functionaries, began to usurp military authority.” - Lyman, “Hist. Chart.” And yet the Persian empire continues more years than the Babylonian empire. Whatever they were doing worked alot better than what the Babylonians did.. Babylon fell in one night.That was all it took.That is a very weak military performance.Sadam Husain's military lasted longer than that. Albert Barns seems to be grasping at straws and ignoring the big picture.Its like saying the United States military is inferior to Sadam Husain's military because there are women and gays in the military .It would be obviously false because the outcome has already been determined.Sadams military was crushed.Babylon fell to the Persian military in a matter of hours. Edited November 20, 2023 by Shilohsfoal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie744 Posted November 20, 2023 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 54 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 2,667 Content Per Day: 1.72 Reputation: 857 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/29/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted November 20, 2023 2 hours ago, Shilohsfoal said: The Persian empire was by far greater than the Babylonian empire.The scripture it talking about the kingdom being inferior ,not the king. another kingdom will arise, inferior to yours Medes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts