Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 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.
8. I considered the horns, and ] I was contemplating the horns, when, &c. The force of the verb is apparent from its use in the Targ. of Onk., as Exo 3:6, ‘he feared to gaze upon the glory of Jehovah,’ and Num 21:9, ‘when he looked attentively at (or contemplated) the serpent of brass.’
another little horn, &c.] R.V. (avoiding a possible ambiguity in the English) another horn, a little one, before which, &c. With ‘little’ cf. Dan 8:9. No doubt the meaning is, little in its beginning, but soon increasing in power, till ‘three of the first horns were rooted up from before it.’ If the fourth beast symbolizes the empire of Alexander, the ‘little horn’ will be Antiochus Epiphanes, whose persecution of the Jews (b.c. 168 165) forms certainly the subject of Dan 8:10-14; Dan 8:24-25, and Dan 11:31-33, and who, in Dan 8:9 (see Dan 8:23), is also represented by a ‘little horn.’ The descriptions at the end of the present verse, and in Dan 7:21 ; Dan 7:25, also suit Antiochus Epiphanes. For further particulars respecting the events of his reign, see the notes on Dan 11:21 ff., Dan 11:30-36 ff., and p. 194 f.
and behold, in this horn, &c.] Another marvel: the horn had the eyes and mouth of a man. The eyes like the eyes of a man imply the faculty of keen observation and insight, and so indirectly the possession of intellectual shrewdness.
and a month speaking great things] i.e. proud, presumptuous things, especially against God, or His people. Cf. Psa 12:3, ‘the tongue that speaketh great things,’ Oba 1:12, lit. ‘neither make thy mouth great,’ Rev 13:5, where the beast with ten horns is given ‘ a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies.’ Comp. Dan 11:36, where it is said of Antiochus Epiphanes that he will ‘speak marvellous things against the God of gods’; and 1Ma 1:24 , where it is stated that, after despoiling the Temple (b.c. 170), he went away, and ‘spake great presumptuousness’ ( ).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Dan 7:8
Another little horn.
The Little Horn is Antichrist
1. By the ruin or destruction of this little horn, the fourth beast, or human kingdom is said utterly and finally to fall (v.11). Therefore, it cannot represent Mahomet.
2. The destroying of the beast and little horn is described in such forms as are in the book of Revelation, interpreted of Antichrist. (Rev 19:20; Rev 20:10-11.)
3. This little horn is conjoined with the ten horns (v. 7,8, 20, 24), accordingly as Antichrist is conjoined with them. (Rev 13:1-18; Rev 17:1-18.)
4. The characters attributed to him are the same which are attributed to Antichrist.
(1) He shall speak great things against the Most High.
(2) He advanceth himself above the civil magistrate.
(3) He changeth the laws and times.
(4) He maketh war with the saints, and prevaileth against them. (Thomas Parker.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 8. Another little horn] Among Protestant writers this is considered to be the popedom.
Before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up] These were probably,
1. The exarchate of Ravenna.
2. The kingdom of the Lombards. And,
3. The state of Rome.
The first was given to the Pope, Stephen II., by Pepin, king of France, A.D. 755; and this constituted the pope’s temporal princes. The second was given to St. Peter by Charlemagne, in 774. The third, the state of Rome, was vested in the pope, both in spirituals and temporals, and confirmed to him by Lewis the pious. These are the three horns which were plucked up from the roots before the little horn.
Were eyes like the eyes of a man] Intimating cunning and superintendence; for the pope calls himself Episcopus episcoporum, the Overseer of overseers.
And a mouth speaking great things.] Full of boasting; pretending to unlimited jurisdiction; binding and loosing at pleasure; promising to absolve from all sins, present, past, and future; and threatening to send to everlasting destruction all kings, kingdoms, and individuals, who would dare to dispute his power and authority.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Daniel
considered, and this calls upon us to consider the matter.
Another little horn: some will have the Turk meant; others, before him, Antiochus Epiphanes; others Julius Caesar; others antichrist. It is certain the horn that riseth out of the he-goat is Antiochus, Dan 8:9-12, but the horn here mentioned riseth out of the fourth beast, or under him. Therefore he must be the Turk, as some will have it, or the Romish antichrist. Not the Turk, since,
1. The horn signified only one king, Dan 7:24.
2. He must gain all the fourth kingdom.
3. He must reign before the kingdom of Christ is erected.
Before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: some will have Egypt, Asia, and Greece to be the three which are possessed by the Turk; but though he hath got the Egyptian and Constantinopolitan, which are two, must the German be the third? He hath pushed hard for it now of late. A mouth speaking great things: this again some interpret of Antiochus, some of Mahomet, some of the Caesars, others of antichrist, all concerning their craft and blasphemies, which properly can be meant but of one.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
8. little hornlittleat first, but afterwards waxing greater than all others. He must besought “among them,” namely, the ten horns. The Romanempire did not represent itself as a continuation of Alexander’s; butthe Germanic empire calls itself “the holy Roman empire.”Napoleon’s attempted universal monarchy was avowedly Roman: his sonwas called king of Rome. The czar (Csar) also professes torepresent the eastern half of the Roman empire. The Romancivilization, church, language, and law are the chief elements inGermanic civilization. But the Romanic element seeks universalempire, while the Germanic seeks individualization. Hence theuniversal monarchies attempted by the Papacy, Charlemagne, Charles V,and Napoleon have failed, the iron not amalgamating with the clay. Inthe king symbolized by “the little horn,” the God-opposing,haughty spirit of the world, represented by the fourth monarchy,finds its intensest development. “The man of sin,” “theson of perdition” (2Th 2:3).Antichrist (1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22;1Jn 4:3). It is the completeevolution of the evil principle introduced by the fall.
three of the first hornsplucked upthe exarchate of Ravenna, the kingdom of theLombards and the state of Rome, which constituted the Pope’sdominions at the first; obtained by Pope Zachary and Stephen II inreturn for acknowledging the usurper Pepin lawful king of France[NEWTON]. See TREGELLES’objections, Da 7:7, “tenhorns,” Note. The “little horn,” in his view,is to be Antichrist rising three and a half years before Christ’ssecond advent, having first overthrown three of the tencontemporaneous kingdoms, into which the fourth monarchy, under whichwe live, shall be finally divided. Popery seems to be afulfilment of the prophecy in many particulars, the Pope claiming tobe God on earth and above all earthly dominions; but the spirit ofAntichrist prefigured by Popery will probably culminate in ONEindividual, to be destroyed by Christ’s coming; He will be theproduct of the political world powers, whereas Popery whichprepares His way, is a Church become worldly.
eyes of manEyesexpress intelligence (Eze 1:18);so (Ge 3:5) the serpent’s promisewas, man’s “eyes should be opened,” if he would but rebelagainst God. Antichrist shall consummate the self-apotheosis, begunat the fall, high intellectual culture, independent of God. Themetals representing Babylon and Medo-Persia, gold and silver, aremore precious than brass and iron, representing Greece and Rome; butthe latter metals are more useful to civilization (Ge4:22). The clay, representing the Germanic element, is the mostplastic material. Thus there is a progress in culture; butthis is not a progress necessarily in man’s truest dignity,namely, union and likeness to God. Nay, it has led him farther fromGod, to self-reliance and world-love. The beginnings of civilizationwere among the children of Cain (Gen 4:17-24;Luk 16:8). Antiochus Epiphanes,the first Antichrist, came from civilized Greece, and loved art. AsHellenic civilization produced the first, so moderncivilization under the fourth monarchy will produce the lastAntichrist. The “mouth” and “eyes” are those of aman, while the symbol is otherwise brutish, that is, it will assumeman’s true dignity, namely, wear the guise of the kingdom of God(which comes as the “Son of man” from above), whileit is really bestial, namely, severed from God. Antichrist promisesthe same things as Christ, but in an opposite way: a caricature ofChrist, offering a regenerated world without the cross. Babylon andPersia in their religion had more reverence for things divine thanGreece and Rome in the imperial stages of their history.Nebuchadnezzar’s human heart, given him (Da4:16) on his repentance, contrasts with the human eyes ofAntichrist, the pseudo son of man, namely, intellectual culture,while heart and mouth blaspheme God. The deterioration politicallycorresponds: the first kingdom, an organic unity; the second, dividedinto Median and Persian; the third branches off into four; thefourth, into ten. The two eastern kingdoms are marked by noblermetals; the two western, by baser; individualization and divisionappear in the latter, and it is they which produce the twoAntichrists.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
I considered the horns,…. The ten horns of the fourth beast; these the prophet particularly looked at, took special notice of them, carefully observed them, their number, form, and situation, and pondered in his mind what should be the meaning of them:
and, behold; while he was attentive to these, and thinking within himself what they should be, something still more wonderful presented:
there came up among them another little horn; not Titus Vespasian, as Jarchi; nor the Turkish empire, as Saadiah; nor Antiochus Epiphanes, as many Christian interpreters; for not a single person or king is meant by a horn, but a kingdom or state, and a succession of governors; as by the other ten horns are meant ten kings or kingdoms; besides, this little horn is a part of the fourth, and not the third beast, to which Antiochus belonged; and was to rise up, not in the third or Grecian monarchy, as he did, but in the fourth and Roman monarchy; and was to continue until the spiritual coming of Christ; or, until his kingdom in a spiritual sense takers place; which is not true of him: and since no other has appeared in the Roman empire, to whom the characters of this horn agree, but antichrist or the pope of Rome, he may be well thought to be intended. Irenaeus k, an ancient Christian writer, who lived in the second century, interprets it of antichrist; of whom having said many things, has these words:
“Daniel having respect to the end of the last kingdom; that is the last ten kings among whom their kingdom should be divided, upon whom the son of perdition shall come; he says that ten horns shall be upon the beast, and another little horn should rise up in the midst of them; and three horns of the first be rooted out before him; and, “behold”, saith he, “in this horn were eyes as the eyes of man”, c. of whom again the Apostle Paul, in 2Th 2:8 declaring together the cause of his coming, thus says, “and then shall that wicked one be revealed c.””
and in a following chapter l the same writer observes,
“John the disciple of the Lord in the Revelation hath yet more manifestly signified of the last time, and of those ten kings in it, among whom the empire that now reigns (the Roman empire) shall be divided declaring what shall be the ten horns, which were seen by Daniel; saying, “the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet, c.” therefore it is manifest, that of these he that is to come shall slay three, and the rest shall be subject to him, and he shall be the eighth among them;”
and Jerom on the place says, that this is the sense of
“all ecclesiastical writers, that when the Roman empire is destroyed, there shall be ten kings who shall divide it among them; and an eleventh shall arise, a little king, who shall conquer three of the ten kings; and having slain them, the other seven shall submit their necks to the conqueror:”
who he further observes is not a devil or demon, but a man, the man of sin, and son of perdition; so as that he dare to sit in the temple of God, making himself as if he was God: now to the Roman antichrist everything here said answers: he is a “horn”, possessed of power, strength, authority, and dominion, of which the horn is an emblem; a “little” one, which rose from small beginnings, and came to his ecclesiastic power, from a common pastor or bishop, to be a metropolitan of Italy, and then universal bishop; and to his secular power, which at first was very small, and since increased; and yet in comparison of other horns or kingdoms, but little; though, being allowed to exercise a power within others, is, or at least has been, very formidable: this “came up among” the other horns; when the northern barbarous nations broke into the empire and set up ten kingdoms in it, this little horn sprung up among them; and while they were forming kingdoms for themselves, he was contriving one for himself; they rose at the same time and reigned together; see Re 17:12:
before whom, there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots; before whom three kings or kingdoms fell, and were subdued as in Da 7:20 which, according to Mr. Mede m, were the kingdoms of the Greeks, of the Longobards, and of the Franks; but, according to Sir Isaac Newton n, they were the exarchate of Ravenna, the kingdom of the Lombards, and the senate and dukedom of Rome; or, according to the present bishop of Clogher o, the Campagnia of Rome, the exarchate of Ravenna, and the region of Pentapolis, which were plucked up by Pipin and Charlemagne, kings of France, and given to the pope; and were confirmed to him by their successor Lewis the pious, and is what is called the patrimony of St. Peter; in memory of which a piece of Mosaic work was made and put up in the pope’s palace, representing St. Peter with three keys in his lap; signifying the three keys of the three parts of his patrimony; and to show his sovereignty over them, the pope to this day wears a triple crown:
and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man; in some monstrous births there have been eyes in the knees, and in the belly above the navel p; but never was there known such a monster as this, to have a horn, and eyes in the horn; horns some monsters have but not eyes in them: these may design the pretended sanctity and religion of the pope of Rome or antichrist, who, though a beast, would be thought to be a man, a religious creature; or his pretended modesty, humanity, and courtesy, when he is all the reverse; or rather his insight into the Scriptures he makes pretension to, setting himself up as an infallible judge of them, and of all controversies: though they seem better to design what he really has than what he pretends to; and may denote his penetration and sagacity, his craft and cunning, and sharp looking out to get power and dominion, temporal and spiritual; and his watchfulness to keep it, that it is not encroached upon, and took away from him; and also all means and instruments by which he inspects his own and others’ affairs; particularly the order of the Jesuits, which are his eyes everywhere, spies in all kingdoms and courts, and get intelligence of what is done in the councils and cabinets of princes: how many eyes this horn had is not said; nor is it easy to say how many the pope of Rome has; he has as many as Argus, and more too, and these sharp and piercing:
and a mouth speaking great things as that he is Christ’s vicar on earth, Peter’s successor, head of the church, and universal bishop; that he is infallible, and cannot err; that he has all power in heaven, earth, and hell; that he can forgive sin, grant indulgences, make new laws, and bind the consciences of men; dispense with the laws of God and men; dispose of kingdoms, and remove and set up kings at pleasure, with many others of the like kind; see Re 13:5.
k Advers. Haeress, l. 5. c. 25. l Ibid. c. 26. m Works, B. 4. p. 779. n Observations on Daniel, p. 75-78, 80, 88. o Inquiry into the Time of the Messiah’s coming, p. 28. p Vid. Schott. Phyica Curiosa, l. 5. c. 25. p. 711, 712.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
CHART I
WHAT HAPPENS? WHEN DOES IT HAPPEN?
The “Little Horn”, Dan 7:8; Dan 7:24-27 introduces a pre-vision of the nature of the anti-christ who shall reveal his true character of enmity against God. This rebellion is first against the worship of Israel’s God, in the midst of the 70th week, after he has entered a covenant with Israel, Dan 9:26-27, as also further described 2Th 2:4-10; Rev 12:7-14; Rev 13:1-8; Rev 17:13.
This event of lie-speaking, deception by the “Little Horn” ruler, leads Israel to enter a 7 year peace pact with him, permitting Israel’s beginning their morning and evening oblations, a thing to be continued under him for 42 months, half a week, or time, times, and half time, at which point he reveals his antichrist character that rages in fury for the following 42 months, until Jesus comes to put him down! V. 13, 14.
TEN KINGS AND THE “LITTLE HORN”
Verse 8:
GENTILE GOVERNMENTS AND THE ANTICHRIST (v. 24-28)
Verse 8 states that Daniel considered the ten horns and as he did there came up among them a “little horn,” before whom there were three of the first horns uprooted or torn away. He noted that in this horn the “little horn,” there appeared eyes, piercing eyes, eyes of intelligence, like the eyes of a man (not those of a best or live animal). And in this “little horn,” there was a mouth speaking “superlatively great things,” a boasting mouth, of pride and arrogance. This “little horn”, v. 20-26, represents the devil in the antichrist, in battle array against God and His people, now and in the end times of the Gentiles, Dan 7:8; Rev 19:20. The “little horn” represents the revival of the spirit of the Roman Empire, which goes back to the origin of the spirit of the Gentile anarchy, when the peoples of the earth attempted to build a tower to heaven, against the will of God, Gen 11:1-9. The “little horn’.” represents the final rise of the son of perdition, the antichrist, the man of sin, out of heathen Gentile kingdoms in disarray, “speaking lies,” preceding the coming of our Lord, about three and one half years or 42 months, Dan 9:25-27; 2Th 2:1-11; 1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 2:22; 1Jn 4:3; Revelation ch. 13; Psa 12:3; Dan 11:36; 2Ti 3:2.
His “eyes” imply intelligence, though used to deceive, even as Satan used such to deceive Eve, Gen 3:5; Eze 1:18.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
Daniel proceeds with his description of the fourth beast. First, he says, he was attentive, with the intention of rousing us to serious meditation. For what is said of the fourth beast, was remarkably memorable and worthy of notice. This, then, is the reason why God struck the heart of his servant with wonder. For the Prophet would not have given his attention to the consideration of the fourth beast, unless he had been impelled to it by the secret instinct of God. The Prophet’s attention, then, sprang from a heavenly impulse. Wherefore it is our duty not to read carelessly what is here written, but to weigh seriously and with the greatest diligence what the Spirit intends by this vision. I was attentive, therefore, says he, to the horns, and behold one small one arose among them. Here interpreters begin to vary; some twist this to mean the Pope, and others the Turk; but neither opinion seems to me probable; they are both wrong, since they think the whole course of Christ’s kingdom is here described, while God wished only to declare to his Prophet what should happen up to the first advent of Christ. This, then, is the error of all those who wish to embrace under this vision the perpetual state of the Church up to the end of the world. But the Holy Spirit’s intention was completely different. We explained at the beginning why this vision appeared to the Prophet — because the minds of the pious would constantly fail them in the dreadful convulsions which were at hand, when they saw the supreme dominion pass over to the Persians. And then the Macedonians broke in upon them, and acquired authority throughout; the whole of the East, and afterwards those robbers who made war under Alexander suddenly became kings, partly by cruelty and partly by fraud and perfidy, which created more strife than outward hostility. And when the faithful saw all those monarchies perish, and the Roman Empire spring up like a new prodigy, they would lose their courage in such confused and turbulent changes. Thus this vision was presented to the Prophet, that all the children of God might understand what severe trials awaited them before the advent of Christ. Daniel, then, does not proceed beyond the promised redemption, and does not embrace, as I have said, the whole kingdom, of Christ, but is content to bring the faithful to that exhibition of grace which they hoped and longed for.
It is sufficiently clear, therefore, that this exhibition ought to be referred to the first advent of Christ. I have no doubt that the little horn relates to Julius Caesar and the other Caesars who succeeded him, namely, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, and others. Although, as we said before, the counsel of the Holy Spirit must be attended to, which leads the faithful forwards to the beginning of the reign of Christ, that is, to the preaching of the Gospel, which was commenced under Claudius, Nero, and their successors. He calls it a little horn, because Caesar did not assume the name of king; but when Pompey and the greater part of the senate were conquered, he could not enjoy his victory without assuming to himself supreme power. Hence he made himself tribune of the people and their dictator. Meanwhile, there were always Consuls; there was always some shadow of a Republic, while they daily consulted the senate and sat in his seat while the consuls were at the tribunals. Octavius followed the same practice, and afterwards Tiberius also. For none of the Caesars, unless he was consul, dared to ascend the tribunal; each had his own seat, although from that place he commanded all others. It is not surprising, then, if Daniel calls the monarchy of Julius and the other Caesars a little horn, its splendor and dignity were not great enough to eclipse the majesty of the senate; for while the senate retained the name and form of honor, it is sufficiently known that one man alone possessed the supreme power. He says, therefore, this little horn was raised among the ten others. I must defer the explanation of what follows, viz., three of these ten were taken away.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
HOMILETICS
SECT. XXIV.THE LITTLE HORN (Chap. Dan. 7:8; Dan. 7:19-25)
We now come to that part of Daniels vision which especially distinguishes it from Nebuchadnezzars dream. The king only saw the feet of the image divided into ten toes: Daniel not only sees ten horns proceeding from the head of the fourth beast, corresponding with these ten toes, but another horn additional to these, which, though appearing as a little horn, engaged the special attention of the prophet, and constitutes the leading object in the vision. The character of the kingdoms of the world was to be concentrated in that horn or the power represented by it, and it was from it that the Church of God was mainly to suffer [165]. As a horn, it was to be a power like the rest; that term, expressive of the powerful weapon of many animals, being figuratively employed in the Scripture to denote power or strength, and so a kingdom or a sovereignty. See Deu. 33:17; Psa. 18:2; Luk. 1:69. In relation to the little horn we have to notice
[165] It is in the fearful shape of the last beast that the world-power will fully manifest that its whole nature is opposed to God. But as the interest which attaches to the four monarchies is led rapidly over the first three to centre in the last, so, for the same reason, in considering the last we are led to the final shape. The description introduces these horns merely to show how an eleventh has sprung up in their midst, a king in whom the full haughty hatred and rebellion against God, His people, and His service, finds its representative. The essential nature of the kingdoms of the world appears concentrated in the fourth kingdom; the nature of the fourth kingdom, in like manner, in its last worldly ruler. Thus it is only at the end that the peculiar character of the world-power, the mystery of iniquity, is unveiled, and we recognise in the eleventh horn no other than he whom Paul calls the Man of Sin and the Son of Perdition (2 Thessalonians 2.) Here, for the first time in the development of revelation, the idea of Antichrist is clearly unfolded; because here, for the first time, the entire course of the development of the godless and God-opposing world is clearly surveyed down to the very end.Auberlen. So Dr. Pusey, who also sees in the Little Horn mainly an Antichrist yet to come. Why should there not be under the fourth empire an antagonism to the true God, concentrated in and directed by one individual, as it was in and by Antiochus in the third? Human nature repeats itself. What man has done, man will do. We Christians look for an Antichrist yet to come. Our Lord forewarned of him and his deceivableness. St. Paul describes such an one as Daniel speaks of. We must not, however, overlook the Antichrist of the past and the present, while even as Protestants we may also acknowledge an Antichrist yet to come.
I. Its rise. It is said to rise among the other ten horns, and so to be contemporaneous with them; and also after or behind them, and so in the time of its appearance posterior to the rest, as well as gradual in its growth and for a time unobserved. Before it, three of the ten were plucked up by the roots and fell, or, as it is interpreted by the angel, it subdued three out of the ten kings or kingdoms, and so made room for itself by occupying their place (Dan. 7:8; Dan. 7:10; Dan. 7:24). The other horns obtained their place as kingdoms out of the body of the fourth beast or Roman empire; this one was to obtain its place out of that beast only indirectly, by gaining it out of the others.
II. Its character and description.
(1.) A little horn; small in comparison with the rest, especially in its commencement, and humble, perhaps, in its profession.
(2.) Diverse from the rest; its diversity consisting in this, that it had eyes in it, like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things,the eyes and the mouth sufficiently indicating a human being as represented by it [166], and a power of a peculiar character; the eyes of a man, not of a god; lamb-like, though speaking as a dragon (Rev. 13:11.)
(3.) The mouth uttered great words against the Most High; hence proud, arrogant, and blasphemous; while from the eyes was a look more stout than his fellows, also indicative of pride and haughtiness above that of the other powers, and an overbearing demeanour in respect to them.
(4.) He was to make war with the saints of the Most High, to wear them out, and prevail against them; a persecuting power, and one whose persecutions should be persevering and successful, against such as adhered to a holy life and the worship of God according to His Word.
(5.) He was to think to change times and laws; lofty in his pretensions, as superior to laws both human and divine, and affecting a power which is the prerogative of God (chap. Dan. 2:21).
5. The saints were to be given into his hand for a definite period, prophetically and enigmatically described as a a time, times, and the dividing of a time; his power over the saints or true worshippers of God to be absolute for a time, but that time a limited one. To form a well-grounded judgment regarding the appearance of this last enemy, observes Keil, we must compare the description given of him here with the apocalyptic description of the same enemy under the image of the beast out of the sea or out of the abyss (Rev. 13:1-8; Rev. 17:7-13); and we may add, with the description of the Man of Sin given by the apostle (2Th. 2:4, &c.), with an obvious allusion to the passage before us.
[166] Eyes like the eyes of man. Eyes and seeing with eyes are the symbols of insight, circumspection, and prudence. The eyes of a man, not merely to indicate that the horn signified a man, which was already distinctly enough shown by the fact of eyes, &c., being attributed to it, nor yet to distinguish it from a beast; but in opposition to a higher celestial being, for whom it might, from the terribleness of its rule and government, be mistaken.Keil. Others have viewed the expression as indicative of the assumed blandness that accompanied papal arrogance, and the sharp look-out kept by the popes on their own and their families interests, as well as those of the Church.
III. Its identification. This power intended to be identified as truly as the four beasts themselves. The minute and varied description obviously given with this view. This description, including both its rise and character, ought apparently to leave no room for doubt as to what is intended by it, and no difficulty in identifying it when the power indicated should appear. The question is, has such a power already appeared, or are we still to look for it? The latter unlikely, as the fourth beast, from which it springs, has confessedly appeared two thousand years ago, and the ten kingdoms, among and behind which it was to rise, have probably been in existence about fourteen centuries. Has, then, any power appeared during that period to which the description is at all applicable, and to which it has been applied? There is a well-known power to which the description has appeared so applicable, that for more than three hundred years the description has been actually and unhesitatingly applied to it by almost all who have studied this passage, with the exception, of course, of those who are in any way connected with the power itself; although it is probable that the horn may not even yet have fully developed itself [167]. That power is the Papacy, with the Bishop of Rome as its head and representative [168]; for nearly thirteen centuries a temporal power, like the other horns, though now no longer such [169]; but so diverse from them as to be at the same time a spiritual power, while the rest were only secular ones. The identity has appeared
[167] Jerome and the fathers, as well as De Lyra, Hugo, and Roman Catholic writers generally, interpret the little horn of the Antichrist, who should come in the end of the world, after the Roman empire is destroyed. Some of the Reformers, as Melanchthon and Osiander, understood it of the Turkish empire. Calvin thinks that historically this prophecy of the Little Horn was fulfilled before the coming of the Messiah into the world, in the person of Julius Csar, Augustus, and the other emperors; but that it may, by analogy, be applied, as it was by some, to the Pope or to the Turks; and these applications, he says, by way of analogy I mislike not. colampadius understood it of the Pope in the West, and the Turkish empire in the East. Bullinger, and the Reformers in general, applied the prophecy entirely to the Papacy. Junius, Polanus, and Willet understood it historically of Antiochus Epiphanes, but typically of Antichrist. Dr. Lee, of Cambridge, applies it to heathen Rome and the persecuting emperors from Nero to Constantine. The Futurists, with Roman Catholic writers, understand it of an Antichrist yet to come.
[168] Dr. Rule observes that the description given of the Little Horn exactly answers to the Papacy, and regards the assumption of absolute sovereignty over the city and territory of Rome by Pope Innocent III. as the uprising of it, a sovereign pontiff over a temporal dominion, armed also with military powers. Here, says Muratori, in relating this event, expired the last breath of the Augusti in Rome; and henceforth the prefects of Rome, the Senate, and the other magistrates, swore fealty to the Roman Pontiff only. Professor Bush says, This Little Horn is unquestionably the ecclesiastical power of the Papacy. This horn did not come till after the empire received its deadly wound by the hands of the Goths.
[169] That the Bishop of Rome became a temporal ruler, receiving his place and rank as such among and soon after the other rulers of the kingdoms formed out of the dismembered Roman empire, every one knows. One of the most remarkable events of recent years was the entire cessation of this temporal sovereignty of the Pope, when in 1870, after the French Emperor had withdrawn his troops from Rome, Victor Emmanuel, as king of Italy, at the voice of the people, assumed the entire government of the country, leaving Pius IX. only the Vatican and its precincts for his residence; the Pope exclaiming against the act as one of wicked sacrilege and spoliation, and endeavouring to rouse all Catholic Europe to aid him in recovering the lost patrimony of St. Peter. The Times of the period said, In the same year the Papacy has assumed the highest spiritual exaltation to which it could aspire, and lost the temporal sovereignty which it had held for a thousand years.
1. In the rise of the Papacy. The Little Horn rose among, and at the same time after or behind, the other ten; while three of these were plucked up and fell before it, so that their place was occupied by it, or, as interpreted by the angel, three kingdoms, states, or powers were subdued by it [170]. It is known that it was while the Northern nations were establishing for themselves kingdoms out of the decaying Roman empire that the Bishops of Rome also became temporal rulers, and that they did so after occasioning the fall of some of those rulers, probably those of Lombardy, Ravenna, and Rome, whose territories then became their own under the name of the States of the Church [171]. A writer on prophecy remarks: The Little Horn came up among the ten horns, of which three fell before it. This determines the appearance of the Little Horn to be not before the appearance of the ten, of which not one came into being till after the year 487 of the Christian era, until which time the Roman empire continued under its emperors, undivided into any of those ten kingdoms which arose afterwards. At that time Augustulus, the last Emperor of the West, was forced to resign; and for three hundred years the empire remained without even a nominal head. It is in remarkable agreement with this fact that Paul speaks of the Man of Sin as being hindered at that time from revealing himself by something which he does not name, but which would one day be taken out of the way; that hindrance being doubtless the Roman imperial power, which for obvious reasons Paul did not think it expedient to name. The circumstance of the three horns or states being rooted up to make way for the temporal power of the Papacy seems openly declared in the triple crown which the Pope still continues to wear.
[170] Before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots. He shall subdue three kings(Dan. 7:8; Dan. 7:24). (yehashpil), shall overthrow, deprive of sovereignty.Keil. Some have understood the number three as indefinite. So Calvin and colampadius, but understanding it as denoting much or many. Most have viewed it as a definite number. Jerome and others after him understood the three horns to be Egypt, Africa, and Ethiopia, which were to be subdued by Antichrist. Melanchthon thought of Egypt, Syria, and Cilicia, to be taken by the Turks; while Osiander and Pfaff understood them to be Asia, Greece, and Egypt. Bullinger, applying the prophecy to the Papacy, regarded the three horns as the Emperor Leo, or the Exarchate of Ravenna, taken by Gregory II.; Childeric, king of France, deposed by Pope Zachary; and the Lombards with the government they obtained from Leo III. Dr. Rule considers them to be the Roman Senate and people, with the so-called patrimony of St. Peter, gained a.d. 498; Apulia, otherwise called Naples, and Sicily, obtained in 1266. He observes that, simultaneously with these acquisitions, the work of persecution, foretold in the next verses, rapidly advanced. According to Mr. Birks, the three horns were the kingdom of the Heruli under Odoacer, that of the Ostrogoths under Theodoric, who at the instigation of the Pope overthrew the former, and took possession of that part of Italy forming the Exarchate of Ravenna, which again, at the Popes instance, was overthrown by Belisarius and Narses, lieutenants of the Emperor Justinian; the third power overthrown being that of the Lombards under Alboin and Aistulph. To obtain freedom from the threatened yoke of the Lombards, and to secure still farther the possession of a temporal dominion, the Pope made his appeal to Pepin, son of Charles Martel, as well as to Charles (Charlemagne) and Carloman, the three kings of the Franks. Pepin and Charlemagne willingly undertook the task of uprooting the Lombard kingdom, the last enemy that stood in the way of the ambitious See. After the surrender of Pavia, the last obstacle was now removed, and the popes rose at length to temporal dominion, and obtained a firm and settled place among the powers and kingdoms of the Western Empire. The Churchs ancient patrimony of farms and houses, says Gibbon, was transformed by the bounty of the Carlovingians into the temporal dominion of cities and provinces; and the donation of the Exarchate was the first-fruits of the victories of Pepin. The ample province of the Exarchate, granted to the Papacy by the usurper Pepin, might comprise all the provinces of Italy which had obeyed the Emperor and his vicegerent; but its strict and proper limits were included in the territory of Ravenna, Bologna, and Ferrara, and its inseparable dependency was the Pentapolis.
[171] The following are extracts from Clements letter, written towards the end of the first century, to allay some disturbances in the Church at Corinth in regard to the pastorate. These things, beloved, we write not only to admonish you of your duty, but to admonish ourselves, for we are in the same race and conflict. Wherefore, let us abandon vain and empty cares, and advance to the glorious and venerable rule of our calling. Let us look to what is beautiful, and pleasing, and acceptable in the eyes of our Creator. Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ, and consider how precious to God is that blood, which, having been shed for our salvation, has offered the grace of repentance to all the world. Christ belongs to those who conduct themselves humbly, not those who exalt themselves over His flock with pride and arrogance. Let us attach ourselves to those to whom grace has been given by God. Let us put on concord with moderation of mind, endued with the gift of self-control. Temerity, arrogance, and audacity belong to those who are accursed of God; moderation, humility, and meekness to those who are blessed of Him. The apostles, preaching the Word through regions and cities, proving their first-fruits in the Spirit, appointed bishops and deacons of those who believed. The apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that contentions would arise about the name of the episcopate, and on that account, being endowed with perfect foreknowledge, they appointed persons previously indicated, and left successions of ministers and officers afterwards described, that other approved men might succeed to their place and discharge their offices. Look diligently into the Scriptures. Take into your hands the epistles of the blessed Apostle Paul. Consider what he wrote to you near the very beginning of his preaching the gospel. Being certainly divinely inspired, he reminded you in an epistle concerning himself, Cephas, and Apollos, that even then there were seditions and party feelings among you. Whosoever is zealous, pitiful, and full of love among you, let him say, If any sedition, contention, or division, has arisen through me, I will depart; I will go away whithersoever you wish; I will do whatever is commanded by the people; that only the flock of Christ may live in peace with the elders (or presbyters) that have been appointed over them.
The tempter, says Gavazzi, came over the Alps in the Gallic Pepin; he showed from a pinnacle of earthly power and aggrandisement the kingdoms of this world, and pledged himself to secure their homage, if, falling prostrate before Gods adversary, Christs Vicar should adore him. The sacrilegious bargain was struck; the ark of the Lord was placed in the temple of Dagon; the bishops of Rome, who over and over again suffered death rather than offer incense to Pagan idols, fell into the palpable snare of Satan; and the hand that bore on its finger the brightest of sacerdotal gems in the ring of the fisherman was outstretched, with scandalous avidity, to burn a fatal frankincense on the altar of secular ambition. A visible change fell on the Papacy. The gory crown of martyrdom was exchanged for the glittering tiara.
Mr. Mede supposed the three uprooted or depressed horns to be, first, the Greeks, that is, the entire kingdom of Italy, which in 554 was ended by the Exarchate or dependent government of the Greek emperor, which continued for fifteen years; second, the Lombards, who possessed the country for about 200 years; and, third, the Franks, who stretched their authority into the immediate vicinity of Rome.
2. In the character of the Papacy.
(1.) The horn was a little one. The territory of the Papacy has always been small in comparison with that of the other powers, never exceeding the extent of an Italian province. The Pope properly and originally a humble minister of Jesus Christ, on a level with the other bishops or presiding ministers of the Churches, and possessing no territory or temporal jurisdiction whatever; so little that the apostle does not even salute or mention him in his Epistle to the Church at Rome. The Epistle of Clement, one of the first Bishops of Rome, if not the very first, written to the Church of Corinth, breathes the very spirit of humility [172], a humility which is affected by his successors, while each calls himself the servant of servants and a successor of the fisherman.
[172] The following are extracts from Clements letter, written towards the end of the first century, to allay some disturbances in the Church at Corinth in regard to the pastorate. These things, beloved, we write not only to admonish you of your duty, but to admonish ourselves, for we are in the same race and conflict. Wherefore, let us abandon vain and empty cares, and advance to the glorious and venerable rule of our calling. Let us look to what is beautiful, and pleasing, and acceptable in the eyes of our Creator. Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ, and consider how precious to God is that blood, which, having been shed for our salvation, has offered the grace of repentance to all the world. Christ belongs to those who conduct themselves humbly, not those who exalt themselves over His flock with pride and arrogance. Let us attach ourselves to those to whom grace has been given by God. Let us put on concord with moderation of mind, endued with the gift of self-control. Temerity, arrogance, and audacity belong to those who are accursed of God; moderation, humility, and meekness to those who are blessed of Him. The apostles, preaching the Word through regions and cities, proving their first-fruits in the Spirit, appointed bishops and deacons of those who believed. The apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that contentions would arise about the name of the episcopate, and on that account, being endowed with perfect foreknowledge, they appointed persons previously indicated, and left successions of ministers and officers afterwards described, that other approved men might succeed to their place and discharge their offices. Look diligently into the Scriptures. Take into your hands the epistles of the blessed Apostle Paul. Consider what he wrote to you near the very beginning of his preaching the gospel. Being certainly divinely inspired, he reminded you in an epistle concerning himself, Cephas, and Apollos, that even then there were seditions and party feelings among you. Whosoever is zealous, pitiful, and full of love among you, let him say, If any sedition, contention, or division, has arisen through me, I will depart; I will go away whithersoever you wish; I will do whatever is commanded by the people; that only the flock of Christ may live in peace with the elders (or presbyters) that have been appointed over them.
(2.) It was diverse from the first (Dan. 7:24), having the eyes and mouth of a man. The difference of the Papacy from the other powers, as already noticed, conspicuous in this, that it was at the same time both a temporal and a spiritual power, the Pope being both a secular prince and a spiritual teacher, or, as Gibbon expresses it, a Christian bishop invested with the prerogatives of a temporal prince. The Pope claimed both swords, the civil and the ecclesiastical; a combination perhaps indicated in the Revelation by the two separate beasts, the one rising out of the sea and the other out of the earth (Rev. 13:1-11), or in the fact that the latter had two horns like a lamb, while it spake like a dragon (Dan. 7:11).
(3 ) His look was more stout than his fellows (Dan. 7:20). It is well known what anathemas were fulminated by the Popes against all who refused to acknowledge their supremacy or submit to their authority; how kings were deposed and their kingdoms placed under interdicts which deprived them of religious ordinances, their subjects released from their allegiance, and their crown given to another. This stout look, and the claim of making and unmaking kings at pleasure, conspicuous in the person of Gregory VII. (A.D. 1073). I have received, said he, from God the power of binding and of loosing in heaven and in earth; and by this power I forbid Henry (the Fourth, Emperor of Germany) the government of the whole realm of Germany and Italy. I also loose all Christians from the oaths they have taken to him; and I decree that no man shall obey him as king [173]. Among the stout words of the Papacy are the following, spoken by the same Gregory: The Roman Pontiff alone can be called universal. He alone has a right to use imperial ornaments. Princes are bound to kiss his feet, and his feet only. He has a right to depose emperors. No book can be called canonical without his authority. His sentence can be annulled by none, but he may annul the decrees of all. It is also to be remembered that the popes claim infallibility.
[173] These were not empty words. Henry, driven to despair, in a winter of unusual severity, crossed the Alps with the determination of seeking the Popes forgiveness and reconciliation. Gregory was at Canossa, a fortress near Reggio. The Emperor was admitted without hit guards into an outer courtof the castle, where he was kept standing for three successive days, from morning to evening, in a woollen shirt, and with bare feet, while Gregory, shut up with the Countess, refused to admit him into his presence. On the fourth day he obtained absolution, but only on condition that he appeared on a certain day to receive the Popes decision as to whether or not he should be restored to his kingdom, till which time he was not to assume the insignia of royalty. It was this same Pope who endeavoured to compel William the Conqueror to do homage for the crown of England, and who menaced Philip I. of France with deposition. The language and bearing of Adrian IV., in 1155, to the Emperor Frederick was of a similar character. The Pope insisted on the Emperor becoming his equerry and holding his stirrup while he mounted. To place your name before ours, said he to the Emperor, is arrogance, is insolence; and to cause bishops to render homage to you, those whom the Scripture calls gods, sons of the Most High, is to want that faith which you have sworn to St. Peter and to us. Hasten then to amend, lest that, in taking to yourself what does not belong to you, you lose the crown with which we have gratified you.
(4.) It had eyes like the eyes of man (Dan. 7:8). The very title of bishop, which is simply overseer, as in Act. 20:28 and 1Pe. 5:3, is in perfect agreement with this mark of the horn. The popes, as bishops or overseers, being spiritual teachers, are supposed to be endowed with wisdom and knowledge to qualify them for their office, of which the eyes of a man are a well-known symbol [174].
[174] See note (2).
(5.) The horn had also a mouth speaking great things, even great words against the Most High. The first of these expressions indicates pride and arrogance, the latter blasphemy. The Papal bulls leave little room for doubt as to the applicability of the former to the Papacy. The tribunals of kings, say they, are subject to the sacerdotal power. Since the Holy Roman Church, over which Christ has willed that we preside, is set for a mirror and example, whatever it has decreed, whatever it now ordains, must be perpetually and irrefragably observed by all men. The words spoken against or (as the word is also rendered) as the Most High [175] are such as tend to set God aside. These have not been wanting in the lips of the Papacy. The Roman Pontiff, says Pope Stephen, is to judge all men, and to be judged by no man. The Pope is styled God, says Pope Nicholas, by the pious prince; and it is manifest that God cannot be judged by man. This mark may be truly regarded as made good, as Bishop Newton observes, by the popes setting up themselves against all laws human and divine, arrogating to themselves godlike attributes and titles, and exacting obedience to their ordinances and decrees. A bull of Pope Boniface declares that all the faithful of Christ are, by necessity of salvation, subject to the Roman Pontiff, who has both swords, and judges all men, but is judged by none [176]. Again we have to remember the claim to infallibility by the Pope, that infallibility having been recently made an article of faith in the Romish Church.
[175] Against the Most High. (le-tsadh), at the side of. Keil observes that this term properly means against or at the side of, and is more expressive than (al); denoting that he would use language by which he would set God aside, and would regard and give himself out as God. Compare 2Th. 2:4.
[176] It is this Pope of whom Gavazzi, in the oration already quoted from, says, Swelling with the pride and pomp of Satanic inflation, Boniface VIII., having fouliy dethroned his still living predecessor, Celestine V., burst on the world with his blasphemous bull, Unam Sanctam, and laid his monstrous mandate on mankind, involving the human race in sacerdotal serfdom. By one fell swoop he abrogated the authority of kings within their dominions, of magistrates within the circle of their attributions, of fathers within the sacred precincts of their households. Popes became arbiters of universal sovereignty, bishops bearded monarchs, and priests lorded it over the domestic hearth. Every human right, claim, property, franchise, or feeling at variance with the predominance of the Popedom was, ipso facto, inimical to Heaven and the God of eternal justice.
(6.) He shall think to change times and laws (Dan. 7:25) [177]. The presence of this mark in the Papacy already apparent. Everything was to be entirely in accordance with Papal decree. The observance of saints days established; the marriage vow, in the case of the clergy, cancelled and marriage itself forbidden [178]; subjects, as, for example, the English in relation to Henry VIII. and Elizabeth, released from their allegiance to their sovereigns; the cup in the Lords Supper forbidden to the laity [179]; and the making and worshipping of images sanctioned [180]. Bishop Newton mentions also as instances of this mark of the Little Horn, the Popes appointing fasts and feasts; canonising saints; granting pardons and indulgences for sins; instituting new modes of worship; imposing new articles of faith [as recently the Immaculate Conception]; enjoining new rules of practice; and reversing at pleasure the laws both of God and man. The traditions of the Fathers and decrees of Councils are made to supersede and set aside the Word of God. The holy and inspired fathers and teachers, says Gregory III., and the six Councils in Christ, these are our scriptures and our light to salvation.
[177] To change times and laws. Keil observes that to change times belongs to the all-perfect power of God (cf. Dan. 2:21), the creator and ordainer of times (Gen. 1:14); and that there is no ground for supposing that (zimnin), times, is to be specially understood of festivals or sacred times, since the word, like the corresponding Hebrew one, (moadhim), does not throughout signify merely festival times (cf. Gen. 1:14; Gen. 17:21; Gen. 18:14, &c.) The sin is that he does not in his ordinances regard the fundamental conditions given by God, but so changes the laws of human life that he puts his own pleasure in the place of the divine arrangements, (dath), a law, rite, custom, or constitution. Calvin, applying the passage to the Roman emperors, says they perverted all laws, human and divine. Dr. Pusey, on the other hand, translates essaying to change worship and law; and has in a footnote, (zimnin) set times, that is, probably, the times of the set feasts (as we speak of sacred seasons), and so the worship of those times. He observes that in Onkelos (zimnin) stands for (moadh im), Gen. 1:14; and Jonathan puts (zimne moed) for (moed), Zep. 3:18. Pseudo-Jonathan uses the word (zeman) in paraphrasing (moadhe Jehovah), the feasts of the Lord. Elsewhere is used of the place of the sacred assembly (Num. 1:1; Isa. 33:20), but of the festival (Lam. 1:4; Hos. 9:5).
[178] A decretal of Callixtus II. says, We entirely interdict priests, deacons, sub-deacons, and monks from contracting marriages; we decide also that, according to the sacred canons, the marriages contracted by persons of this kind be dissolved, and the persons brought to penance. This Pope, as well as Pope Agatho, writes that the decretal epistles of the Roman Pontiff are to be received among the Scriptures, though they are not embodied in the code of canons, just as the Old and New Testaments are so received, because a judgment of holy Pope Innocent seems to be published for doing so.
[179] In regard to the use of the cup, Pope Gregory VII. thus wrote to Wratislaus, king of Bohemia, What your people ignorantly require can in no wise be conceded to them; and we now forbid it by the power of God and His holy Apostle Peter.
[180] Gregory III. convened an assembly of 93 bishops in 732, and with their assent published a general excommunication against all who were opposed to the worship of images. The same Pope wrote to the Emperor Leo, Do you cease to persecute images and all will be quiet.
(7.) He was to make war with the saints and prevail against them, and wear them out (Dan. 7:21; Dan. 7:25). It is well known that one of the most prominent features of the Papacy in past centuries was the persecution of the saints under the name of heretics, that is, of those who refused, in matters of doctrine and practice, to submit to the authority of the Pope instead of the Word of God, and who said, with Peter and the other apostles, We ought to obey God rather than men (Act. 5:29; Act. 4:19) [181]. If any one, said Pope Nicolas in a Council at Rome, shall presume to dispute the dogmas, commands, interdicts, sanctions, or decrees wholesomely published by the head of the Apostolic See, let him be accursed. It is permitted neither to think nor to speak differently from the Roman Church. Such were to be handed over to the secular power, to be punished with the loss of goods, imprisonment, and even death. The burning of heretics, according to the bull De Comburendo, is too well known in England. The term Crusades was given to those military enterprises undertaken to extirpate the Waldenses and Albigenses; and the same Papal indulgences were promised to those who fell in such undertakings as were bestowed on those who died in the wars against the infidels [182]. The wearing out of the saints may be seen in the decree of Pope Pelagius, that those guilty of schism or separation from the Roman See were to be crushed by the secular power, and restrained not only by exile, but by proscription of their goods, and by severe imprisonment. How far the Papacy prevailed against the saints, or so-called heretics, appears from the fact that in a Council of the Lateran, held in May 1514, about three years and a half before the breaking out of the Reformation under Luther, the Hussites were summoned to appear; and when no appearance was made, the doctor of the Council uttered the remarkable words, There is an end to resistance to the Papal rule and religion; there is none to oppose; the whole body of Christendom is now subject to its head.
[181] Make war with the saints (Dan. 7:21). In our own country, in the short reign of Queen Mary, three hundred persons are said to have been cruelly put to death for no other reason than because they refused to acknowledge the supremacy of the Pope. This is written within little more than a stones throw of the monument that commemorates the martyrdom of Ridley, Latimer, and Cranmer, and the cross in front of Balliol College, Oxford, that marks the spot on which they suffered death. It is computed that in the South of France, between the twelfth and eighteenth centuries inclusive, about a million of those called Waldenses and Albigenses suffered death as heretics, especially by armies sent against them for that purpose, after receiving the papal blessing. Nearly a million suffered on the same account after the institution of the order of the Jesuits. In the Netherlands, it was the boast of the Duke of Alva that 36,000 heretics had been put to death by the common executioner within a few years. In Ireland, 150,000 are said to have been massacred in one province in virtue of a papal edict dated May 25, 1643, in which the Pope granted a full and plenary indulgence and absolute remission of all their sins to all the Christians in the kingdom of Ireland, so long as they should war against the heretics and other enemies of the Catholic faith. In the Massacre of St. Bartholomews Day, 1572, thirty thousand at least, in Paris and throughout France, are said to have been horribly butchered within thirty days, for which the Pope ordered public thanks to be given, and a medal to be struck in commemoration of the event. This feature of the Little Horn is acknowledged and justified in the Rhemish New Testament, where it is said in a note at Rev. 17:6, that the blood of the heretics is not to be considered as the blood of the saints, but is no more than the blood of thieves, mankillers, and other malefactors, for the shedding of which, by order of justice, no commonwealth shall answer. So Pope Urban II., encouraging the shedding of such blood, states, We do not count them murderers who, burning with zeal for their Catholic mother against the excommunicate, may happen to have slain some of them. Sismondi, himself a Roman Catholic, intimates what was the crime of those whose blood was thus to be shed: Many sects, he says, existed in Provence, and this was the necessary consequence of the freedom of inquiry which was the essence of their doctrine. With one accord they considered that the Romish Church had changed the nature of Christianity, and that she was the object described in the Apocalypse as the woman of Babylon. He adds: To maintain unity of faith, the Church had recourse to the expedient of burning all those who separated themselves from her.
[182] Let the Catholics, said Innocent III. in the Lateral) Council, who, after taking the sign of the cross, devote themselves to the extermination of heretics, enjoy the same indulgence, and be protected with the same privilege, which is granted to those who go to the succour of the Holy Land.
(8.) The saints were to be given into the hand of the Little Horn for a limited period, here called a time, times, and the dividing of a time. This enigmatical period, found also in chap. 12, as well as in the Book of Revelation, is generally understood to be equivalent to three years and a half, or, as it is expressed in the Apocalypse, 1260 days, 360 being reckoned to a year, and also forty and two months (Rev. 12:14; Rev. 12:16; Rev. 11:2-3; Rev. 13:5 [183], the half of the seven times already mentioned in connection with Nebuchadnezzars insanity. The period in the text for the dominion of the Little Horn over the saints is also that of the scattering or crushing of the power of the holy people (chap. Dan. 12:7); of the womans abode in the wilderness (Rev. 12:6; Rev. 12:14); of the treading of the holy city under foot by the Gentiles (Rev. 12:2); of the prophesying of the two witnesses in sackcloth (Rev. 12:3); and of the effective continuance of the beast out of the sea (Rev. 13:5). Probably the same period, and the same experience of humiliation and suffering on the part of the saints under the same power, intended under these various symbolical representations. The three years and a half, however, might be understood either literally or figuratively; either as ordinary years, or, as they are called, prophetical ones, each day being reckoned a year. The latter is generally understood, though there may be also a fulfilment of the prophecy on the smaller as well as on the larger scale. It is remarkable that from the time that the Bishop of Rome became a temporal prince, namely, in the early part of the seventh century (A.D. 606), till the cessation of his temporal power in 1870, is just 1264 years, the period in the text on the larger or year-day scale, with perhaps four years more [184]. It is also remarkable that from the time in which all Christendom was declared to be subject to the Roman Pontiff, May 1514, to the breaking out of the Reformation under Luther, that effected the deliverance of so large a portion from his spiritual sway, was just three years and a half on the shorter or literal day scale. Twelve centuries ago, more or less, the saints, or those who chose to obey the Word of God rather than the edicts and decrees of man, seemed to be given into the hand of the Roman Pontiff. There seems little reason to doubt that happily that period of subjection has come to an end. The Papacy can no longer persecute the so-called heretics as before. The Scriptures are openly sold and the Gospel is freely preached even in Rome itself. The Inquisition is at an end. Dr. Achilli and the two Madiai were among its last prisoners, the latter having been given up at the demand of Protestant Europe. The French Revolution in 17923, exactly 1260 years after the edict of Justinian seemed formally to give the Church into the hands of the Roman bishop, was doubtless the commencement of his fall [185]; one of the most marked results of that event being the freedom of religious worship among the nations of Europe, which during the last ten years may be said to have been all but complete. This circumstance might seem to leave no doubt as to the identification of the Little Horn with the Papacy, and to establish the opinion that has largely prevailed for centuries [186].
[183] A time and times and the dividing of a time (Dan. 7:26). Some have understood by this only an indefinite though lengthened period. So Calvin, who applied the prophecy to the persecutions under Nero and other Roman emperors. By the dividing or half of a time he understood the shortening of the period for the elects sakes. Bullinger viewed it as a definite time fixed by God, but known only to Himself. colampadius understood half a week or three days and a half, God thus shortening the time. Osiander regarded it as three and a half prophetic years or 1278 solar years, during which the rule of Mahometanism, commencing in the year 613, should continue. Jerome, and Roman Catholic writers after him, understand it of three and a half literal years, the period for the tyranny of Antichrist before the end of the world. Similarly other Futurists. Junius and a few others applied it historically to the time during which Antiochus Epiphanes persecuted the Jews. Joseph Mede was the well-known reviver of the year-day theory. Before his time it was a vague assertion; he first gave it shape and form, and plausible consistency. Since his day it has been adopted by many intelligent critics, among whom are Sir Isaac Newton, Bishop Newton, Faber, Frere, Keith, and Birks.Translators Preface to Calvin on Daniel. Professor Lee refers the expression to the latter half (mystically speaking) of the seventieth week of our prophet (ch. 9); that week of seven days being equivalent here to Ezekiels period of seven years. Professor Bush says, The grand principle into which the usage of a day for a year is to be resolved is that of miniature symbolisation. Mr. Brooks (Elements of Prophetic Interpretation) says, The literal meaning of a time is a year; and the expression in Dan. 7:23 may signify, mystically, if calculated by lunar time, a period of 1260 years. Mr. Bickersteth (Practical Guide to the Prophecies) says, The time, times, and half a time, the forty and two months and 1260 days, are the same interval; the time, times, and half a time of Daniel and the Revelation are the same period; a prophetic day is a natural year, as three and a half times are the half of seven times, the whole season of Gentile power, and the same with the latter times of St. Paul He thinks the three and a half times began with Justinians Code in 532533. By this edict (of Justinian), says Mr. Irving, ecclesiastical power over the faith of the West and against the saints who dwelt there was given to the Bishop of Rome, which imperial edicts being seconded by the imperial arms, brought to nothing the heretical powers who might have opposed his entering into possession. In twenty years from that date he ordered heretics to be burned by the temporal powersthe first indication of that mixture and combination of powers, civil and ecclesiastical, which is the proper character of the whole period. Then, also, mass was introduced. In sixty years he had made such great strides towards absolute supremacy, that in the reign of Gregory the Great, who resisted the Bishop of Constantinoples supremacy, were introduced purgatory, invocation of saints, expiations by masses, lustrations of the Blessed Virgin, and the celibacy of the clergy was attempted. In seventy years he obtained from the emperor the sole title of Universal Bishop. In little more than a century the service was performed in Latin, and the ignorance of the people sealed. In two centuries the Pope had obtained the pride and power to excommunicate the Emperor of the East for prohibiting image-worship. Dr. Cox thinks that the computation must be made from the period when the Little Horn or ecclesiastical power of the Church of Rome should arise; and that that application of the prophecy is most probable which fixes on the time when, by the decree of Phocas, the Roman Pontiff was constituted Universal Bishop and supreme head of the Church. This was in the year of our Lord 606. Some students of prophecy see in the term times, &c, the half of the period of Nebuchadnezzars humiliation and insanity, symbolical of the time (2520 years) during which the covenant people should be under the dominion of the Gentile monarchies as the chastisement of their unfaithfulness, this period having different crises as stages of commencement. Of these, Mr. Guinness (Approaching End of the Age) mentions four, from the invasion of Pul, king of Assyria, in 770 b.c., to the final fall of the throne of David and full captivity of Judah under Nebuchadnezzar in 602. These stages of commencement have corresponding terminations, the first being in 1750, the period of Voltaire, and the last in 1918, yet to come. It was during the latter half of these mystical seven times that the Little Horn was to have power over the saints, the case of Israel being bound up with that of the Christian Church, which was to be under captivity by the same power that was to tyrannise over Israel, namely, the last of the four beasts. See farther the note under chap. Dan. 12:7.
[184] The spiritual power of the Papacy may, of course, have a different period for its termination, and outlive the temporal, which constituted it the Little Horn. Mr. Bosanquet remarks: We see no room left for doubt that these 1260 years mark the duration of the Papal power. The temporal power of the Papacy seems to be vanishing before our eyes, if indeed it has not already ceased to exist [it has apparently done so, namely, in 1870], but how long the spiritual power shall be allowed to linger on in the ancient seat of its dominion, is a question to be solved by time. Wherever we may be disposed to fix the date of its commencement, it is clear that the time of expiration cannot be very far remote. Some, however, date from the eighth century. From the time, says Bishop Newton, of Pepins grant of Aistulphs dominions in 755, the popes, having now become temporal princes, did no longer date their epistles and bulls by the year of the Emperors reign, but by the year of their own advancement to the Papal chair. Charles the Great, son and successor of Pepin, confirmed the grant, adding other territories, and giving the Pope to hold under himself the duchy of Rome, over which he gradually obtained the absolute authority, being about the same time declared superior to all human jurisdiction, while Charles in return was chosen Emperor of the West. Lewis the Pious, son and successor to Charles the Great, confirmed the donations of his father and grandfather, including Rome and its duchy, the popes to hold them in their own right, principality, and dominion to the end of the world. It should seem, adds the Bishop, that the time, times, &c., are to be computed from this full establishment of the power of the Pope in the eighth century. Gibbon speaks of Gregory I., who wrote so defiantly against the Emperor Leo about images in the eighth century, as the founder of the Papal monarchy; and Milner says, From this time I look on the Pope of Rome as Antichrist.
[185] One of the effects of the Revolution in 17923 was the destruction of the established religion in France, the chief support of the Papacy. As the edict of Justinian in 533 might be said to be the beginning of the Little Horn as a temporal power, and the giving of the saints into his hand, though its full growth was not for some time after, so the commencement of his fall as such, and the deliverance of the saints from his hand, might be dated from the French Revolution, though not to be completed till several years afterwards. The Convention, which met on the 20th September 1792, first decreed the eternal abolition of monarchy, and on the seventh day of its sitting, it was proposed by M. Manuel that, as royalty was abolished, the order of priests and all religious establishments should be abolished with it. This, however, was only done on the 31st of May in the following year, when the success of the Jacobin conspirators completed the destruction of the civil establishment of religion in France. On the 17th of June the report of Camille Jourdan on the freedom of religious worship was ordered to be printed by the unanimous vote of the Council of Five Hundred.
[186] It was the belief of the Early Church that the little horn of Daniel and the Man of Sin spoken of by Paul (2 Thessalonians 2.) was the same Antichrist, who was even expected shortly to appear. Justin Martyr says, He being at hand who was to speak blasphemous words against the Most High, whom the prophet Daniel foretold was to continue for a time, times, &c. Tertullian, referring to 2 Thessalonians 2., says, Who can this be but the Roman State, the division of which into ten kingdoms will bring on Antichrist, and then the Wicked One shall be revealed? Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, about the year 360, referring to the same passage, says, Thus the predicted Antichrist will come when the times of the Roman empire shall be fulfilled, and the consummation of the world shall approach. Ten kings of the Romans shall rise together, in different places indeed, but they shall reign at the same time. Among them the eleventh is Antichrist, who by magical and wicked artifices shall seize the Roman power. Cyril believed that the apostasy or falling away which was to precede the appearance of the Man of Sin, or Antichrist, had already taken place in his day. Formerly, he says, the heretics were manifest, but now the Church is filled with heretics in disguise. For men have fallen away from the truth, and have itching ears. Is it a plausible theory? All listen to it gladly. Is it a word of correction? All turn away from it. Most have departed from right words, and rather choose the evil than desire the good. This therefore is the falling away, and the Enemy (Antichrist) is soon to be looked for.
As yet probably they had no idea that the Bishop of Rome was to be he; for his coming was to be a mystery of iniquity, and mystery was to be the name of the system of which he was the head, as the word is said to be actually found on the Papal mitre. But a few centuries awoke the suspicion. In the Middle Ages it was believed by many that the Antichrist had already appeared in the person of the Popes. In the tenth century Arnulph, Bishop of Orleans, addressing a Council at Rheims, said: O deplorable Rome, who in the days of our forefathers produced so many burning and shining lights! thou hast brought forth in our times only dismal darkness worthy of the detestation of posterity. What think you, reverend fathers, of this man, the Pope, placed on a lofty throne, shining with purple and gold? Whom do you account him? If destitute of love and puffed up with pride of knowledge only, he is Antichrist sitting in the temple of God. It is said in a work published in 1120, The great Antichrist is already come; in vain is he yet expected; already by the permission of God is he advanced in years. Roman Catholic writers, of course, refuse to believe that the Papacy is the Little Horn or Antichrist; and some few Protestants agree with them in thinking that that power is still future; while others, as the German Rationalists, would see in it only Antiochus Epiphanes. In reference to this last opinion, it is enough to say, with Auberlen, that the Little Horn is found among the ten kingdoms of the fourth beast or Roman Empire, while Antiochus Epiphanes belonged to the third or Grecian, which, according to chap. 8, is well known to have been divided, not into ten, but into four kingdoms. That the Roman Empire was broken up into about ten different kingdoms many centuries ago, and that the Papacy, as a temporal power, sprung up among them, are facts not to be disputed.
From the prophecy regarding the Little Horn we may notice
1. The providence of God as ruling both in the world and in the Church. He putteth down one and setteth up another. Even the Little Horn, which was to prove such a scourge to the Church and to the world, was entirely under His control, and employed as His instrument in accomplishing the purposes of His infinite wisdom. The saints were to be given into His hand, as Judah and its king were given into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar (chap. Dan. 1:2). The same Providence limited the continuance of the subjection in both cases. What is done wickedly by man is permitted and controlled wisely and holily by God.
2. The comfort of Gods people to know that their sufferings are meted out, both in intensity and duration, by a Fathers hand. It was a fiery trial that was to try the saints when they were to be given into the hand of the Little Horn, who was to make war upon them, and prevail against them, and wear them out. But it was to continue only for a time, a long time indeed, as indicated in the expression a time, times, and the dividing of a time; but still it was to come to an end. Thou shalt have tribulation ten days,not more. In measure when it shooteth forth, Thou wilt debate with it: He stayeth His rough wind in the day of His east wind (Isa. 27:8). The time to favour Zion, even the set time, comes.
3. The preciousness and power of divine grace in sustaining the people of God under protracted persecutions and afflictions. No small affliction to the saints who held fast the Word of God to have war made upon them by a mighty and prevailing power, and to be worn out by exile, imprisonment, and loss of goods, year after year, the same thing being continued century after century. No small amount of grace needed to sustain them in the conflict, so as to be faithful unto death. But the promise is sure. My grace is sufficient for thee; my strength is made perfect in weakness. As thy days, so shall thy strength be. Though appointed as sheep to the slaughter, we are made more than conquerors through Him that loved us. They overcame through the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony.
4. The divine, and therefore indestructible, nature of the Church and religion of Jesus Christ, which has held out under centuries of cruel persecution. To exhibit this, probably one reason why such a state of things is permitted to take place. The bush burns, but is not consumed, because the Lord Himself is in it. The gates and power of hell unable to prevail against the Church of Christ, because founded on the Rock of Ages. The Church outlives the furnace, because One like the Son of Godthe Son of God Himselfis with it there. If this counsel or work be of men, it will come to nought; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it. Although, says Sismondi, himself a Roman Catholic, for two hundred years the fires were never quenched, still every day saw Catholics abjuring the faith of their fathers, and embracing the religion which often guided them to the stake. In vain Gregory IX., in 1231, put to death every heretic whom he found concealed in Rome.
5. Cause for joy and thanksgiving that the wearing out of the saints by the Little Horn is at or near its close. There may yet be possibly a period of intense suffering from that same Little Horn under a changed aspect; but if so, it will be but of short continuance; perhaps the time, times, and dividing of a time, on the shorter literal day scale. But we may well rejoice and give thanks that the long-protracted period of wearing out is at an end. The fires of Smithfield and the tortures of the Inquisition, we may believe, are over. Even in Rome men may read the Bible and worship God according to it without being afraid. Let us thank God for liberty of conscience in Europe.
6. The prediction regarding the Little Horn, with its manifest fulfilment, another remarkable evidence of divine inspiration. That horn, as rising out of the fourth beast, and among the other ten, acknowledged not to be Antiochus Epiphanes, and must therefore be found long after the time when the prophecy was written. The prediction minute and detailed; and its fulfilment, in a power that for twelve centuries has been the most prominent and conspicuous one in Europe, singularly exact. The fulfilment of such prediction, though perfectly natural, yet partaking of the nature of a miracle, as being beyond any mere human power to foresee it, and as such an evidence of the divine origin of the prediction.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
(8) I considered.Literally, I kept on looking. Here, for the first time in the course of the vision, there appears a change taking place in the object itself. While the three beasts had passed away unchanged in any material addition, among the ten horns of the fourth beast there was seen to grow up a little horn. which destroyed three of the other horns. That a man, and not a kingdom, is intended, though the man may be the representative of a kingdom, appears from the mention of the eyes of a man, indicating craft and cunning, and the mouth speaking great things, implying vain-glory and blasphemy.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
8. This little horn and his horrible deeds will be described in detail later (Dan 7:24-25; chap. 11). It may be noticed, however, that it is the conduct of the king represented by this little horn which makes this fourth empire the most terrible and most hated of all. (See note Dan 7:7.) That this king, with the boastful and blasphemous mouth (Dan 7:25; Dan 11:36) and “the eyes of a man” (symbolizing keen sagacity, artfulness, and spying vigilance, compare Dan 8:23), was Antiochus Epiphanes even Zockler and Gutschmidt agree. Lagarde’s conjecture (1891), that it designated Vespasian, hardly needs confutation. Konig ( Einleitung, p. 390) and others have shown how far Vespasian failed to fit the description, even if the date of the book could permit such a reference. Kamphausen well says that Lagarde’s guess is no more scientific than that of the old woman of Freiburg who in 1882 declared that this little saucy horn was no doubt the Prussian empire.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Dan 7:8. Another little horn This refers to Antichrist, or the papal usurpation. See on Dan 7:24.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Dan 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.
Ver. 8. And I considered the horns. ] For without a serious and sedulous consideration I could not have kenned it. So slyly and secretly worketh the mystery of iniquity.
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.
a Alsted., Chron.
I considered = Iwas considering.
the horns. Mentioned in Dan 7:7.
little horn = a horn of small beginnings. This identifies this vision with those of Ch. Dan 8:9, Dan 8:11, Dan 8:12. See App-90. The first of twelve titles given to the power commonly known as “the Antichrist”: it is used again in Dan 8:9. Compare Dan 11:21-30. Note the other titles: “the king of Babylon” (Isa 14:4); “the Assyrian” (Isa 14:25); “Lucifer, son of the morning”, in opposition to “the bright and morning star” (Isa 14:12); “the Prince that shall come” (Dan 9:26); “the king of fierce countenance” (Dan 8:23); “the vile person” (Dan 11:21); “the wilful king” (Dan 11:36); “the man of sin” (2Th 2:3); “the son of perdition” (2Th 2:3); “that wicked (or lawless) one” (2Th 2:8. Rev 13:18); “the beast with ten horns” (Rev 13:1).
man = a mortal man. Chaldee ‘enash. App-14.
speaking great things. This is a further development, explained in verses: Dan 7:11, Dan 7:20, Dan 7:25; Dan 8:11; Dan 11:36, Dan 11:37; 2Th 2:3, 2Th 2:4. Rev 13:5, Rev 13:6.
Dan 7:8
Dan 7:8 I consideredH1934 H7920 the horns,H7162 and, behold,H431 there came upH5559 amongH997 them anotherH317 littleH2192 horn,H7162 beforeH4481 H6925 whom there were threeH8532 ofH4481 the firstH6933 hornsH7162 plucked up by the roots:H6132 and, behold,H431 in thisH1668 hornH7162 were eyesH5870 like the eyesH5870 of man,H606 and a mouthH6433 speakingH4449 great things.H7260
Dan 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.
The horns or the figures of power associated with the fourth beast are of special interest to Daniel. There were the first ten horns and the little horn coming up among them was the eleventh in number. Much is said in description of this eleventh horn later in Daniel’s vision and an understanding of who this was in very important in understanding the beast of Revelation because the fourth beast in Daniel’s vision and the beast of Revelation are the same. The rest of chapter Daniel 7 projects the events of the book of Revelation and especially the apocalyptic details of its chapters thirteen and seventeen. And this eleventh horn is a very prominent figure with an important role, both in this vision and in reality within the Roman Empire.
Rev 13:1-10 will present the Roman Empire as a beast coming up out of the sea, having ten horns and seven heads Furthermore, but in reverse order, Imperial Rome, as the beast in Rev 13:2, will share characteristics of the three former empires by being like unto a leopard and its feet were “as the feet of a bear” and his mouth “as the mouth of a lion The eleventh horn in Daniel’s vision has a strong probability of being an apocalyptic reference to the Roman Emperor Domitian who reigned from AD 81 to 96.
Rev 17:1-18 will pick up the thrust of the thirteenth chapter with the added detail of the city of Rome as Mystery, Babylon the Great Therein, verses 8-11 will present Daniels projected eleventh horn as an eighth, because the very three which Daniel presents as being plucked up by the roots are no longer counted. These three kings would be Galba, Otho and Vitellius.
Galba reigned from June of 68 to January of 69 and was killed by the soldiers of Otho. He was the first ruler of the The Year of the Four Emperors which was a year in the history of the Roman Empire, AD 69, in which four emperors ruled in a remarkable succession. The other three emperors were Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian. Otho reigned from January of 69 to April of 69 and committed suicide. Vitellius reigned from April of 69 to December of the same year and was executed while trying to resign. Vespasian then assumed full leadership of the Roman Empire. History places his reign from June of AD 69. Obviously there was some contention over who the real emperor was. None of the three, Galba, Otho nor Vitellius were ever accepted as the legal leaders of the Empire, fully accepted by the Senate and supported by the military. Their reigns were during a time of Roman civil war and they were all “plucked up” before ever attaining the full stature of an emperor. It is highly likely that emperor Domitian was the eleventh horn in Daniel’s vision and with the removal of the three “plucked up” horns, was the eighth in John’s vision in Revelation chapter 17.
The Imperial Roman Empire had its beginning with Augustus in the year 26 BC. Augustus was the first constitutional emperor and he was also the emperor when Christ was born, so the numbering of the horns in Daniel’s vision starts with him.
(1) Augustus (Octavian) 31 BC – AD 14
(2) Tiberius AD 14-37
(3) Gaius Caligula) AD37-41
(4) Claudius AD 41-54
(5) Nero AD 54-68
(6) Galba AD 68-69 The Roman Civil Wars
(7) Otho AD 69 The Roman Civil Wars
(8) Vitellius AD 69 The Roman Civil Wars
(9) Vespasian AD 69-79
(10) Titus AD 79-81
(11) Domitian AD 81-96
It is worthy of notation here that there is another credible interpretation of the eleven horns of Daniel. Rex A Turner Sr. makes an outstanding case for Vespasian as the eleventh horn. The key to his interpretation is that he claims the text of Dan 7:7 says that the eleventh horn actually put down the three that were plucked up and that the numbering of the kings starts with Pompey. Verse 24 affirms this to be the case.
A serious difficulty with this understanding is that Vespasian destroyed Jerusalem. Dan 7:21-22 says that the eleventh horn “made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom”. Vespasian was not known for war against the Christians. The Jews who were left in Jerusalem when it was destroyed were not saints and they never possessed the kingdom of God as we understand it in the New Testament and as it is meant in Dan 7:22.
Moreover, Rev 17:10 places the writing of the book during the 6th emperor, Vespasian, not counting the three that were “plucked up”. If Pompey were the first as Turner affirms, then the book of Revelation was written during the reign of Claudius Caesar who reigned from AD 41-54. Such a dating of the book of Revelation cannot be supported internally or historically. It is this Bible student’s belief that Domitian was the eleventh horn of Daniel chapter 7.
Revelation 17 records ten horns as being ten kings of the client kingdoms of the Roman Empire. We cannot assume that the ten horns, followed by the eleventh horn in Dan 7:7-8; Dan 7:11; Dan 7:20-25, are the same as the ten horns in Rev 17:3; Rev 17:7; Rev 17:12-17. The fact is that the respective texts of Daniel and Revelation rule otherwise. The eleven horns in Daniel are not to be identified with the ten horns in Revelation. The eleventh horn of Daniel, and the eighth horn of Revelation are one and the same. And as we proceed further with this study of Daniel 7 we will see that this eleventh horn is a prominent figure in Daniel’s vision.
little horn
The vision is of the end of Gentile world-dominion. The former Roman empire (the iron kingdom of Dan 2:33-35; Dan 2:40-44; Dan 7:7 will have ten horns (i.e. kings, Rev 17:12 corresponding to the ten toes of the image. As Daniel considers this vision of the ten kings, there rises up amongst them a “little horn” (king), who subdues three of the ten kings so completely that the separate identity of their kingdoms is destroyed. Seven kings of the ten are left, and the “little horn.” He is the “king of fierce countenance” typified by that other “king of fierce countenance,” Antiochus Epiphanes, Dan 8:23-25 the “prince that shall come” of Dan 9:26; Dan 9:27 the “king” of Dan 11:36-45 the “abomination” of; Dan 12:11; Mat 24:15 the “man of sin” of 2Th 2:4-8 and the “Beast” of Rev 13:4-10. See “Beast”; Dan 7:8; Rev 19:20.
another: Dan 7:20-25, Dan 8:9-12, Rev 13:11-13
eyes like: Dan 8:23-25, Rev 9:7
a mouth: Dan 7:25, Dan 11:36, 1Sa 2:3, Psa 12:3, 2Th 2:4, 2Ti 3:2, 2Pe 2:18, Jud 1:16, Rev 13:1, Rev 13:5, Rev 13:6
Reciprocal: Deu 28:63 – plucked from Psa 94:4 – boast Jer 48:25 – horn Dan 2:33 – General Dan 7:11 – the voice Dan 7:24 – another Dan 8:25 – through Dan 11:4 – be plucked Dan 11:21 – shall stand 2Ti 3:1 – perilous Rev 12:3 – ten Rev 17:3 – full Rev 17:12 – the ten Rev 19:20 – the false
Dan 7:8. Religion was a state affair in the world empires, and the success or failure of any conflict between church and state depends on which was the stronger at any given time. The ten horns of the fourth beast were the temporal powers named in the preceding verse, and each of them had some jurisdiction over the religious lives of its subjects. A9 a rule that jurisdiction was exercised in harmony with the will of the beast to which the horn belonged. But in time a little horn sprang up among these temporal powers, and it also had a religious theory, and there was some kind of conflict between it and the temporal powers and the result was that three of them were subdued or plucked up. The little horn was the papacy that started with anmll proportions but expanded as the years went by. There is some uncertainty as to which temporal powers were the three and I shall not attempt to determine it. But the purposes of this commentary do not require any definite conclusion here. The characteristics of eyes of a man and mouth speaking great things identify the horn as the papacy.
Dan 7:8. I considered the horns Viewed and observed them exactly, otherwise he could not have observed the little horn, whose rise was scarce discernible at first; and behold there came up among them Much about the same time, Rev 17:12; another little horn Distinct from the ten horns, and of a different constitution. Some have understood by this the Turkish empire, and consider Egypt, Asia, and Greece as being the three horns torn up or reduced thereby; but the more generally received and probable opinion refers it to antichrist, or the Papal hierarchy, which rose to the height here described from very small beginnings: see on Dan 7:24. The eyes, like human eyes, indicate the perspicacity, foresight, and cunning of this power; and the mouth speaking great, or presumptuous things, is not unlike the man of sin, described by St. Paul, whose coming should be after the working of Satan with all deceivableness of unrighteousness, 2Th 2:9-10 : see also Rev 13:5-6.
7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little {p} horn, before whom there were {q} three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn [were] {r} eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
(p) Which is meant of Julius Caesar, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero, etc., who were as kings in effect, but because they could not rule, except by the consent of the senate, their power is compared to a little horn. For Muhammad did not come from the Roman Empire, and the pope has no vocation of government: therefore this cannot be applied to them, and also in this prophecy the Prophet’s purpose is chiefly to comfort the Jews until the revelation of Christ. Some take it for the whole body of antichrist.
(q) Meaning a certain portion of the ten horns: that is, a part from the whole estate was taken away. For Augustus took from the senate the liberty of choosing the deputies to send into the provinces, and took the governing of certain countries to himself.
(r) These Roman emperors at the first used a certain humanity and gentleness, and were content that others, as the consuls, and senate, should bear the names of dignity, so that they might have the profit. And therefore in election and counsels they would behave themselves according as did other senators: yet against their enemies and those that would resist them, they were fierce and cruel, which is here meant by the proud mouth.
Daniel noticed an eleventh horn arising among the 10, which displaced three of the 10 horns. This horn had human eyes, probably symbolic of intelligence, and a mouth that spoke boastfully (cf. Dan 7:11; Dan 7:20; Dan 7:25). This is evidently Antichrist (cf. Isa 27:1; Mat 24:5; Mat 24:15; 2Th 2:3-4; 1Jn 2:18; 1Jn 4:3; Revelation 13; Revelation 17; Revelation 19). Daniel saw another "little horn" in another vision that he reported having (Dan 8:9-11). However, the differences between these two little horns argue for their being different rulers, as my comments on Dan 8:9-11 will show. Rulers represent the nations that they lead, as well as the rulers themselves (cf. Dan 7:17; Dan 7:23).
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)