Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 7:17
These great beasts, which are four, [are] four kings, [which] shall arise out of the earth.
17. The four beasts represent four kings, or ( Dan 7:23) four kingdoms, the ‘king’ in each case being not an individual king, but a typical king, embodying the characteristics of the empire ruled by him. The angel does not however dwell more fully on the ‘beasts,’ or interpret their symbolism; but hastens ( Dan 7:18) to explain the nature of the kingdom which is to succeed theirs.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
These great beasts, which are four, are four kings – Four kings or four dynasties. There is no reason for supposing that they refer to individual kings, but the obvious meaning is, that they refer to four dominions or empires that would succeed one another on the earth. So the whole representation leads us to suppose, and so the passage has been always interpreted. The Latin Vulgate renders it regna; the Septuagint basileiai; Luther, Reiche; Lengerke, Konigreiche. This interpretation is confirmed, also, by Dan 7:23, where it is expressly said that the fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth. See also Dan 7:24.
Which shall arise out of the earth – In Dan 7:2 the beasts are represented as coming up from the sea – the emblem of agitated nations. Here the same idea is presented more literally – that they would seem to spring up out of the earth, thus thrown into wild commotion. These dynasties were to be upon the earth, and they were in all things to indicate their earthly origin. Perhaps, also, it is designed by these words to denote a marked contrast between these four dynasties and the one that would follow – which would be of heavenly origin. This was the general intimation which was given to the meaning of the vision, and he was satisfied at once as to the explanation, so far as the first three were concerned; but the fourth seemed to indicate more mysterious and important events, and respecting this he was induced to ask a more particular explanation.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 17. These great beasts – are four kings] See the preceding verses, where the following explanations are inserted and illustrated.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Men of the earth, of earthly principles, idolatrous, ambitious, sensual, tyrannical; who, after they have acted their parts, shall be driven off the stage into the tiring rooms of death and destruction.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
17. kingsthat is, kingdoms.Compare Da 7:23, “fourthkingdom”; Dan 2:38; Dan 8:20-22.Each of the four kings represents a dynasty. Nebuchadnezzar,Alexander, Antiochus, and Antichrist, though individuallyreferred to, are representatives of characteristic tendencies.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
These great beasts, which are four, are four kings,…. Or kingdoms, as the Septuagint, Vulgate Latin, and Arabic versions; and so Jarchi, Aben Ezra, and Saadiah; so the fourth beast is called the fourth kingdom, Da 7:23 or a succession of kings in four kingdoms or monarchies, comparable to beasts for their strength, cruelty, and tyranny: these are the words of him that stood by, of one of the angels Daniel applied to, to know the meaning of his dream; and might be better rendered, “as to these c great beasts, which are four”; for their quality beasts, for their quantity great, and for number four. The meaning is,
four kings shall arise out of the earth; or kingdoms; which have an earthly original and foundation; are supported by earthly and worldly means, and with earthly and worldly views; and are different from the kingdom of Christ and his saints, which is not of the world, though it may be in it: this explains what is meant by the great sea, from whence these beasts are said to come up, Da 7:3, nor is it any material objection that the first of these kingdoms, the Babylonian, was risen already, and almost at an end; since the denomination is taken from the larger number; three of them were to arise, and the first was of the same original with them; thus it is said, Da 11:2, that three kings of Persia should stand up, and yet Cyrus, who was one of them, reigned already.
c “Quod attinet”, Michaelis.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Here the angel answers Daniel concerning the four beasts which had been shewn him in the vision. He says, therefore, Four kingdoms arose, and by the name kingdom he means monarchy; for we know that the Persians had many kings until Alexander transferred to himself the empire of the East. Although Cyrus had seven or eight successors, yet the Persian empire continued through them all. And as we saw before, although whatever Alexander had acquired by his arms was divided among his four successors, yet it still remained the Macedonian kingdom. The same thing must be said concerning the fourth kingdom. Although we know consuls to have been created yearly at Rome, yet that government lasted till Julius Caesar destroyed it, and consumed the strength of the empire, so as to surpass by his power the splendid altitude which had been long and widely conspicuous in the world. Hence the angel replied, By the four beasts four kingdoms are denoted: he says, shall arise; and yet the Chaldean had long ago arisen, and was now verging under Belshazzar to its fall. But it was proposed by the angel to teach the Prophet and all the people that there was no reason why revolutions should disturb them too much. The Israelites then saw themselves lying as if dead, yea, actually buried and concealed under the earth. For exile was to them equivalent to the tomb. For this reason, then, the angel announces the springing up of four kingdoms, while the first was then flourishing; but, as I have already said., this suits very well within the scope and object of the prophecy. He had formerly said from the sea, but the word “sea” is used metaphorically, since the condition of the earth was turbulent through many ages. As, therefore, nothing was stable, God appropriately set forth the whole world under the figure of the sea. He afterwards adds, They will obtain the kingdom of the holy lofty ones Here interpreters vary considerably, because, as I have before explained it, some take this prophecy to relate to the kingdom of Turkey, others to the tyranny of the Pope of Rome, and extend what the Prophet here says to the final judgment. There is nothing surprising, then, in this diversity of opinion shewing itself more fully in the various details. By sacred holy ones some understand angels; but there is still much controversy about the words, for the noun of saints is “in regimen,” as if the Prophet, had said saints of lofty ones, properly speaking. (23) Similar passages justify those who take it “in the absolute state.” But if we follow the grammatical construction, we cannot explain it otherwise; but the former noun may be put in a state of regimen, as we have said. And I embrace this opinion. Some refer it to the one God, but. I think this a profane way of expression. I have no doubt about the Prophet meaning sons of God by sacred lofty ones, because, though they are pilgrims in the world: yet they raise their minds upwards, and know themselves to be citizens of the heavenly kingdom. Hence by the word עליונין, gnelionin, “lofty ones,” I have no doubt; the Prophet means heavenly powers; that is, whatever we can conceive of divinity, and whatever is exalted above the world. I will1 now give my reasons shortly why I like this sense the best.
If we call the holy lofty ones God himself, what sense can we elicit from the passage? Did the Chaldeans and the rest of the monarchies usurp and transfer to themselves the power of God? There, is some truth in this, because all who domineer without submitting to the one God despoil him of his peculiar honor, and are rather robbers than kings. But the Prophet, in my opinion, understood something else from the angel, namely, that the Church should lose all form and dignity in the world during the flourishing of these four monarchies. We know the sons of God to be heirs of the world; and Paul, when speaking of the promise given to Abraham, says, he was chosen by God as heir of the world. (Rom 4:13; Heb 1:2) And this doctrine is sufficiently known — the world was created for the sake of the human race. When Adam fell from his lawful rights, all his posterity became aliens. God deprived them of the inheritance which he had designed for them. Now, therefore, our inheritance must be restored through Christ, for which reason he is called the only heir of the world. Thus it is not surprising if the angel says that tyrants, when they exercise supreme dominion, assume and arrogate to themselves the peculiar property of the sacred lofty ones, meaning the people of God. And this suits very well with the assertions of the present passage concerning the Church being deprived of its dignity, eminence, and visibility in the world. For then God’s people were like a putrid carcass, the limbs of which were separated and dispersed on all sides, without any hope of restoration. Lastly, although by the permission of Darius, and the edict and liberality of Cyrus, some portion of them returned to their country, yet what was that nominal return? They had but a precarious dwelling in the inheritance divinely promised them; they were pressed on all sides by their enemies, and were subject to the lust and injustice of them all. For the Church had no empire under the Persians. After the third change we know how miserably they were afflicted, especially under Antiochus. That nation was always opposed to them, but then they were almost reduced to extremities, when Antiochus endeavored furiously to abolish the whole law and worship of God. Under the Macedonian kingdom the Jews were in constant slavery; but when the Roman army penetrated those regions, they felt the horrible tyranny of the fourth beast, as we have already seen. Lastly, it is sufficiently evident from the continual history of those times, that the sons of God were always under the yoke, and were not only cruelly but ignominiously treated.
(23) The Latin here refers to the Hebrew construction. The French translation has expressed Calvin’s meaning without keeping close to the words. Les saincts des souverains is the French reading of the Hebrew regimen. See Dissertations at the end of this volume. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(17) Four kings.Kingdoms are frequently represented by their heads or founders; hence kings and kingdoms are occasionally used synonymously. (Comp. Dan. 8:21.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
17, 18. The four beasts symbolize four kings (or, rather, kingdoms, Dan 7:23), at the end of whose brutal rule the kingdom of the saints, ruled over by “one like unto a son of man,” shall take the sovereignty. “As Michael, ‘the great prince,’ is not identical with the people of God (Dan 10:21; Dan 12:1), but is rather their representative and defender, so here it seems most satisfactory to understand the Son of man (Dan 7:13) as the personal representative and Prince of the people of the saints (Dan 7:27).” Terry. So the saints of Christ shall reign with him in glory (Rom 8:17; 2Ti 2:12; Mat 19:28; Rev 2:26-27, etc.).
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
A Brief Explanation of the Vision ( Dan 7:17-18 ).
‘These great beasts which are four, are four kings who will arise from the earth. But the saints of the most high will receive the kingdom, and will possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.’
Note that the interpretation states that the kings arise from the earth, not from the sea. The idea of the sea was conveying ideas, but was not to be taken literally. And they are four kings. This has in mind the four kings who are most prominent in the empires as depicted, but the kings represent their empires. In Dan 7:23 they are four empires, growing from the work of the four kings. However, the people of God need not be concerned about these kings and empires, for in the end the kingdom, the everlasting kingdom, will be theirs. Note the emphasis on its everlastingness. (This has nothing to do with any Millennial kingdom). We are probably to see the four kings as Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, Alexander the Great and the Anti-God, (the horn, the small one).
‘The holy ones (saints) of the Most High.’ This does not mean Israel as such, but those who are faithful to God and His covenant and thus separated to Him. Apart from this passage the word ‘holy ones’, used in this way, is found also in Dan 8:24 (‘people of the holy ones’, thus the holy people); see also Psa 16:3; Psa 34:9. Note that they ‘receive the kingdom’. It is not obtained by their own strength and power. But once received it is their possession for eternity.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Dan 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, [are] four kings, [which] shall arise out of the earth.
Ver. 17. These great beasts are four kings,] i.e., A succession of kings, all of them truculent and savage towards the saints.
Which shall arise out of the earth.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
These great beasts, &c. In Dan 7:17-18 we have therefore the interpretation of this vision, which needs no further interpretation by man.
shall arise. The two which had already arisen cannot therefore be included: Babylon and Medo-Persia,which almost (at this time) equalled Babylon in extent. The vision is not continuous history, but the prophecy of a crisis: and refers to the ten toes of the fifth power of Daniel 2. See note on Dan 7:12. In this, and in each successive vision we are always directed to the end and consummation. Compare Dan 7:26; Dan 8:17-19; Dan 9:26; Dan 11:40; Dan 12:4, Dan 12:9, Dan 12:13. Mat 24:14, Mat 24:15. See App-90.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Dan 7:17
Dan 7:17 TheseH459 greatH7260 beasts,H2423 whichH1768 are four,H703 are fourH703 kings,H4430 which shall ariseH6966 out ofH4481 the earth.H772
Dan 7:17
These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
Here Daniel is told that the great beasts represent world empires. These empires are personified in the images of men who were naturally associated with them. This is further expounded upon in Daniel chapter 8 where the Medo-Persian Empire is identified directly in verse 20 and the Grecian Empire is identified in verse 21. These would be the second and third beasts in Daniel’s vision, the first one having already been dispatched.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
beasts
The monarch vision of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 2) covers the same historic order as the beast vision of Daniel, but with this difference: Nebuchadnezzar saw the imposing outward power and splendour of the “times of the Gentiles” Luk 21:24; Rev 16:19 while Daniel saw the true character of Gentile world-government as rapacious and warlike, established and maintained by force. It is remarkable that the heraldic insignia of the Gentile nations are all beasts or birds of prey.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
great: Dan 7:3, Dan 7:4, Dan 2:37-40, Dan 8:19-22
out: Dan 7:3, Psa 17:14, Joh 18:36, Rev 13:1, Rev 13:11
Reciprocal: Gen 36:30 – dukess in the Psa 76:4 – mountains 1Co 10:4 – that Rock
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE HUMAN COMEDY
These great beasts, which are four kings.
Dan 7:17
The age of the quadruped is to go out, the age of brain and heart is to come in, wrote Emerson. Is not that the pith of Daniels vision?
And thus the land of Camelford was waste,
Thick with wet woods and many a beast within,
And none, or few, to scare or chase the beast;
So that wild dog and wolf and boar and bear
Came night and day and rooted in the garden of the king,
Till Arthur came and slew the beast.
That was Tennyson in his profoundly allegorical poem the Idylls of the King. But Daniel had anticipated him by more than two millenniums. In an age dark as an Egyptian night with trouble personal and national, he saw the history of the destiny of the world; he saw that at bottom all the tumult of time was the struggle between the Beast and the Man, animalism and humanity striving for possession of the world. He foresaw that Man was predestined to triumph over the Beast, and to cheer all fainting souls he sang this idyll of the king. After the fearful vision of the beasts, hurtful, untameable, terrible, came a beautiful vision of another world, and in a thick concourse of superhuman beings came at length one like unto a son of man, that was a real man. Not the half-animal man born from below, but man completely born from abovecoming with the clouds of heaven, still a true manneither beast nor angel. And to the man is given the dominion of the beast-ridden earth. The kingdom of the world in which the winged lion, the bear, the many-headed leopard, and the nameless terror with teeth of iron contend for mastery, is given by Him who sits on the throne of fire toa man.
I. Mans earliest struggle was with animal forces.What an eminent stride from the day when man waged daily battle and set a nightly watch against the beasts of the earth, to the day when the hind could yoke the willing ox to the plough and harness the horse to the car; when the milkmaids with merry morning songs troop forth to the field unafraid to collect the white tribute from the full udders of the lowing herd; when the child could play with the purring cat, and the boy call to his dog as to a friend that never betrayed. To have thus domesticated, civilised, semi-humanised so many creatures was not the least of the achievements of man.
II. But man had not yet succeeded in taming himself, and no wild thing of the woods was half so wild, so insatiable, so cruel as man could be. In him the animal instincts were intensified by all the passion of an immortal nature, and the animal powers were multiplied a thousandfold by human intelligence. When Buffon, the naturalist, produced his great work on Natural History, revealing the marvellous variety of species in the animal world, the idea flashed on Balzacs great mind that all history was a struggle between animalism and humanity. What were the misers, the voluptuaries, the voracious men of commerce, the selfish politicians, the heartless women of fashion, but specimens of animalised humanitycreatures in whom the powers of the human mind and soul are degraded to the service of the purely animal instincts of acquisitiveness, sensuality, and display, or in St. Pauls fearful phrase carnal mindssouls run to flesh. Could we view life from that other world, see it in Gods light, we should need no further commentary on Daniels words. Think for a moment of a man entering on a profession. He is perhaps endowed with splendid natural gifts, which he has raised to their highest power by education and made lustrous by wide culture. But if his sole aim be self-advancement, if he be motived only by goldbags or desire for fame, what is such an one seen from above but a winged lion? A magnificently endowed animal, whose forest is the city of London, and whose prey is men. Then of commerce. If a man put no limit to competition, if his effort to succeed becomes a passion for making money for its own sakea passion which impels him to hew down others without ruth or pity,was not such a man like the bear with the rib of some victim still in his mouth? Imperialism is a fine mouth-filling word, but what is it? The desire to realise the Greater Britainthe essential unity of English-speaking menthe passion to conserve and strengthen the virtues characteristic of the English nation,to fulfil the mission laid up by the will of God to be everywhere true to her own best traditions as the home of liberty! Then God bless Imperialism! But Sir Edward Russell says that when he asked Mr. Rudyard Kipling whether a certain colonial personage had any moral ideals, the reply was, Tut! Tut! it is enough that he is building up an empire. It is not enough. Imperialism regardless of moral consideration is seamanship regardless of navigation,a folly and a crime. Daniels Beast with the iron teeth that devoured and broke in pieces and stamped the residue with his feet, and was slain. This Beast is one of the perils of the world to-day. We do not wantwe dreadan Imperialism arising out of the sea. We want the Imperialism that comes with the clouds of heaven. We must hold this blood sacred. There must be no weakness or hesitancy. This war must not be stopped, but ended. Victory must be a victory for all, not the triumph of a party, or even of a people, but of humanitythe coming again of Jesus Christ, whose watchword is Glory to God in the highest, peace on earth, goodwill towards men!
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
Dan 7:17. I shall avoid lengthy or unnecessary repetition of Interpretations that have been given in the forepart of the chapter. The four kings are the same as the four great beasts in verse 3, and the four kingdoms of Dan 2:38-40.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
The interpreter gave Daniel a general answer to his question. He stressed that each of the four beasts represented a king (or kingdom, cf. Dan 7:23). They arose from the earth’s population, which is what the sea symbolized (Dan 7:2; cf. Isa 17:12-13; Isa 57:20-21; Jer 46:7-8).
"The ’four kings’ obviously refer to four kingdoms, as the beasts represent both a king and a kingdom." [Note: Walvoord, Daniel . . ., p. 172.]