Saturday, May 20, 2006

The Key to the Interpretation - Part Three - Two Little Horns

In 168 B.C. when Rome conquered Macedonia, it was then only a 'little horn'. That is, it was a Latin kingdom of small beginnings. In the centuries following, Rome would 'wax exceeding great' (Dan 8:9) and eventually absorb all the territory occupied by the three previous world empires (Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece).

In a stunning fulfillment of Daniel 8:11, Matthew 24:2, Luke 19:44, and Luke 21:6, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Jewish temple in 70 A.D.

Why is it that almost without exception the Christian church in our day fails to recognize Jesus' application of Daniel 8:11 to the Roman destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D.? Nothing displays this shocking lack of belief in Jesus' words more than the words of the commentators themselves.

John Gill writes:

...and the place of his sanctuary was cast down: not that the temple was destroyed by him (Antiochus), but it was profaned and rendered useless; the worship of God was not carried on in it, but the image of Jupiter was set up in it, and it was devoted to the service of an idol; yea, the altar was pulled down, and all the vessels and ornaments of the temple were taken away and destroyed... (emphasis mine)

Doesn't this amount to admission that by Antiochus the sanctuary was not in fact 'cast down', thus proving that Gill himself has misapplied the passage?

Albert Barnes Writes:

Was cast down - The temple was not entirely destroyed by Antiochus, but it was robbed and rifled, and its holy vessels were carried away.

Again, isn't this then a glaring admission of unbelief? Isn't it even more shocking that when we come to Jesus' words in Matthew 24:2 - that of the temple there would not be one stone left upon another that would not be 'thrown down' - that neither of these commentators connect these two passages of scripture together?

In all of this there seems to be a 'prophetical blind spot' when it comes to identifying the 'little horn' of Daniel 8. While most commentators have little trouble identifying the 'little horn' of Daniel 7 with Rome, almost none seem to see to Roman connection in Daniel 8.

Now, surely someone will ask how these things can be so. After all, isn't the 'little horn' of Daniel 8 said to spring from one of the four divisions of the Grecian Empire, while the 'little horn' of Daniel 7 appears among ten other horns of the Roman Empire? Even believing the evidence that Rome did in fact conquer and come out of Macedonia, how do we reconcile this with the 10 horns among which the 'little horn' of Daniel 7 arises?

These are the right kinds of questions and deserving of careful investigation. Unfortunately many believers fall for the wrong kinds of answers!

So the first question we might ask is: Are these horns the same? That is, do they represent the exact same power at the exact same time?

Now, the 'little horn' of Daniel 8 is clearly the Romans who in 70 A.D. cast down the Jewish sanctuary and temple. But not at that time, nor at any previous time can it be shown how that horn arose among ten horns as described in Daniel 7. Whether the ten horns there be literal kings, nations, or powers of another nature, it would be nearly impossible to show show that the 'little horn' of Daniel 8 arose among 10 of any of these.

While the 'little horn' of Daniel 7 is clearly Roman too, it is clear that these both cannot represent the exact same thing at the exact same time. What this should however indicate to us is that they are related to each other, and like each other in a very significant way.

The way in which these two horns are related is this:

1) Daniel 8 gives the entire program of the Roman power from its meager beginnings until it is destroyed by Christ's coming and kingdom. It started as a 'little horn' which first conquered Macedonia, then went on to absorb all the territory of the three previous world empires. The Romans cast down the Jewish temple, destroyed the Jewish nation, put to death our Savior, persecuted the early church, put to death many of the Lord's apostles, corrupted the Christian faith by introducing pagan doctrine and idolatry, and under a 'Holy Roman Empire' severely persecuted and put to death many true believers. THIS is the 'little horn of Daniel chapter 8. It is a panoramic overview of the pre-written history of ROME from start to finish.

2) On the other hand, the 'little horn' of Daniel 7 describes the Roman power only in its last state before it falls under severe judgment.

3) Putting these two thoughts together we can conclude that although the Roman Empire would start as a 'horn of small beginnings' it would 'wax exceeding great towards the east, towards the south, and towards the pleasant land'. In this great state represented by the fourth beast of Daniel 7, it would destroy the Jewish temple. HOWEVER, it would subsequently again become a 'horn of small beginnings', this time arising among ten horns of the Roman Empire, and in this last condition become the final persecuting power of the saints.

Note this: Rome would start out small, become great, but then be reduced again to a 'little horn' which would grow into the final persecuting power before it would be destroyed by Christ's kingdom.

How could a kingdom such as Rome start so small, become so great, and then begin again as a 'horn of small beginnings'? These visions seem extremely enigmatic, and in fact their full interpretation was not even made known to Daniel (Dan 12:4).

But make no mistake; the Bible absolutely predicts this very thing elsewhere, but in a passage of scripture that many have found equally as enigmatic and confusing. But might we suggest that this very confusion stems from a misunderstanding of Daniel Chapters 7 and 8?

Note these words given to the apostle John in 95 A.D.:

Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition...

Before preceding, note a few observations about this verse:

1) The time frame here is from John's perspective in 95 AD. What he is beholding had existed prior to that time, did not exist in his day, and would arise again.

2) Whatever interpretation we come to should not use loose language. For example, some say that the 'beast' here is the 'antichrist'. In that case one would have to say that the antichrist existed before John's time, did not exist in John's time, and would rise again subsequent to John's time. A definition such as this simply does not work, nor does it work if we simply say that this beast is Rome.

But when we apply the language and the information we have learned from Daniel 7 and 8, it fits into this prophecy perfectly.

Note:

1) Rome started as a 'horn of small beginnings'.

2) It started as a small nation in Italy ruled by Latin Kings.

3) In John's time it no longer existed in this form, but had become a vast empire ruled by emperors.

4) It was at some future time to become again a 'horn of small beginnings' under the reign of LATIN KINGS, and would subsequently severely persecute the saints.

In this the angel would say to John; 'The beast once was a 'little horn' - a little latin kingdom, but this kingdom right now is not. However, it will arise again out of the abyss yet again as a 'little horn', a little latin kingdom of small beginnings, and in that form it will go into perdition.

Note this carefully friends... In Daniel chapters 7 and 8 you see two 'little horns'. Both are Roman but both obviously do not arise at the same time although they are similar in a very important way. Similarly in Revelation 17 you see a beast that 'was, is not, and shall arise' - that is to say that the beast that 'was' is like the beast that 'shall arise' in a very important way. Both are 'little horns' of small beginnings with similar characteristics.

And as the 'little horn' of Daniel 7 is the final persecuting power of the saints, so is the beast of Revelation 17 - thus these two prophecies are inseparably linked.

But as the first 'little horn' grew into a beast which desecrated the Jewish worship and temple, the second would grow into a beast which would desecrate the Christian worship and temple. Both are Roman, both had small beginnings, and both began as latin kingdoms.

These truths are generally hidden from the student of God's Word if they fail to recognize that BOTH the 'little horns' of Daniel chapters 7 and 8 are Roman, and both have similar beginnings, although appearing at different times.

Next time we will have much more to say about the 'Beast' of Revelation 17 and 13.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home