Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 7:4

The first [was] like a lion, and had eagle’s wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man’s heart was given to it.

4. The first beast.

eagle’s wings ] The ‘eagle’ ( nesher) of the O.T., as Tristram has shewn ( Nat. Hist. of the Bible, p. 172 ff.), is properly a vulture, though not the ordinary carrion vulture, but the Griffon-Vulture, or Great Vulture, a “majestic bird, most abundant, and never out of sight, whether on the mountains or the plains of Palestine. Everywhere it is a feature in the sky, as it circles higher and higher, till lost to all but the keenest sight, and then rapidly swoops down again” (Smith’s Dict. of the Bible, ed. 2, i. 815).

were pluckt ] were plucked off.

lifted up from the earth ] on which, as an animal, it had been lying.

upon the feet ] upon two feet.

a man’s heart ] i.e. a man’s intelligence: cf. on Dan 4:16.

The first beast was like a lion, with the wings of the Griffon-Vulture: it combined consequently the characteristics of the noblest of quadrupeds and of one of the most majestic of birds the indomitable strength of the lion, and the power of the vulture to soar securely on high, to descry its prey from afar, and to alight unerringly upon it. It corresponds to the head of gold in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Dan 2:32; Dan 2:38), and denotes, analogously to that, the Babylonian empire (comp. the simile of the lion applied to Nebuchadnezzar in Jer 49:19, and that of the Griffon-Vulture to either Nebuchadnezzar, or his armies, in Jer 49:22; Hab 1:8; Eze 17:3 (see Dan 7:12); Lam 4:19). After a time however a change passes over the figure. Its wings are taken away, i.e. it is deprived of the power of flight; its rapidity of conquest is stopped; nevertheless it is lifted up into an erect position, and receives both the form and intelligence of a man. It seems that Ewald, Keil, Pusey (p. 69 f.) and others are right in seeing here an allusion to what is narrated in ch. 4: the empire is regarded as personified in its head; in Nebuchadnezzar’s loss of reason its powers were crippled: during this time he is described (Dan 4:16) as having a beast’s heart; afterwards, when his reason returned, and he glorified God (Dan 4:34; Dan 4:37), he gave proof that he possessed the heart (intelligence) of a man; the animal (i.e. heathen) character of the empire disappeared, and it was, so to say, humanized in the person of its representative.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

The first was like a lion – It is to be assumed, in explaining and applying these symbols, that they are significant – that is, that there was some adaptedness or propriety in using these symbols to denote the kingdoms referred to; or that in each case there was a reason why the particular animal was selected for a symbol rather than one of the others; that is, there was something in the lion that was better fitted to symbolize the kingdom referred to than there was in the bear or the leopard, and this was the reason why this particular symbol was chosen in the case. It is to be further assumed that all the characteristics in the symbol were significant, and we are to expect to find them all in the kingdom which they were designed to represent; nor can the symbol be fairly applied to any kingdom, unless something shall be found in its character or history that shall correspond alike to the particular circumstances referred to in the symbol, and to the grouping or succession. In regard to the first beast, there were five things that entered into the symbol, all of which it is to be presumed were significant: the lion, the eagles wings – the fact that the wings were plucked – the fact that the beast was lifted up so as to stand up as a man – and the fact that the heart of a man was given to it. It is proper to consider these in their order, and then to inquire whether they found a fulfillment in any known state of things.

(a) The animal that was seen: the lion. The lion, the king of beasts, is the symbol of strength and courage, and becomes the proper emblem of a king – as when the Mussulmans call Ali, Mahomets son-in-law, The Lion of God, always victorious. Thus it is often used in the Scriptures. Gen 49:9, Judah is a lions whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? The warlike character, the conquest, the supremacy of that tribe are here undoubtedly denoted. So in Eze 19:2-3. What is thy mother? A lioness: she lay down among lions, she nourished her whelps among young lions. Here is an allusion, says Grotius, to Gen 49:9. Judea was among the nations like a lioness among the beasts of the forest; she had strength and sovereignty. The lion is an emblem of a hero: 2Sa 23:20, He slew two lion-like men of Moab. Compare Gesenius zu Isa. i. 851. So Hercules and Achilles are called by Homer thumoleonta, or leontothumon – lion-hearted – Iliad e 639, ee 228, Odyssey l 766. See the character, the intrepidity, and the habits of the lion fully illustrated in Bochart, Hieroz. lib. iii. c. 2, pp. 723-745 – Credner, der prophet Joel, s. 100. f. Compare also the following places in Scripture: Psa 7:2; Psa 22:21; Psa 57:4; Psa 58:6; Psa 74:4; 1Sa 17:37; Job 4:10; Jer 4:7; Jer 49:19; Joe 1:6; Isa 29:1-2. The proper notion here, so far as the emblem of a lion is concerned, is that of a king or kingdom that would be distinguished for power, conquest, dominion; that would be in relation to other kings and kingdoms as the lion is among the beasts of the forest – keeping them in awe, and maintaining dominion over them – marching where he pleases, with none to cope with him or to resist him.

(b) The eagles wings: and had eagles wings. Here appears one peculiarity of the emblem – the union of things which are not found joined together in nature – the representation of things or qualities which no one animal would represent. The lion would denote one thing, or one quality in the kingdom referred to – power, dominion, sovereignty – but there would be some characteristic in that king or kingdom which nothing in the lion would properly represent, and which could be symbolized only by attaching to him qualities to be found in some other animal. The lion, distinguished for his power, his dominion, his keeping other animals in awe – his spring, and the severity of his blow – is not remarkable for his speed, nor for going forth to conquest. He does not range far to accomplish his purpose, nor are his movements eminent for fleetness. Hence, there were attached to the lion the wings of an eagle. The proper notion, therefore, of this symbol, would be that of a dominion or conquest rapidly secured, as if a lion, the king of beasts, should move, not as he commonly does, with a spring or bound, confining himself to a certain space or range, but should move as the eagle does, with rapid and prolonged flight, extending his conquests afar. The meaning of the symbol may be seen by comparing this passage with Isa 46:11, where Cyrus is compared to a ravenous bird – calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsels from a far country. The eagle is an emblem of swiftness: Jer 4:13, His horses are swifter than eagles; Jer 48:40, Behold, he shall fly as an eagle, and shall spread his wings over Moab. See also Jer 49:22; Lam 4:19; Hab 1:8.

(c) The clipping of the wings: I beheld until the wings thereof were plucked The word used ( merat) means, to pluck or pull, as to pull out the beard (compare Neh 13:25; Isa 50:6), and would here be properly applied to some process of pulling out the feathers or quills from the wings of the eagle. The obvious and proper meaning of this symbol is, that there was some check put to the progress of the conqueror – as there would be to an eagle by plucking off the feathers from his wings; that is, the rapidity of his conquests would cease. The prophet says, that he looked on until this was done, implying that it was not accomplished at once, but leaving the impression that these conquests were extended far. They were, however, checked, and we see the lion again without the wings; the sovereign who has ceased to spread his triumphs over the earth.

(d) The lifting up from the earth: and it was lifted up from the earth, and made to stand upon the feet as a man. That is, the lion, with the wings thus plucked off, was made to stand upright on his hind feet – an unusual position, but the meaning of the symbol is not difficult. It was still the lion – the monarch – but changed as if the lion was changed to a man; that is, as if the ferocity, and the power, and the energy of the lion had given place to the comparative weakness of a man. There would be as much difference in the case referred to as there would be if a lion so fierce and powerful should be made so far to change his nature as to stand upright, and to walk as a man. This would evidently denote some remarkable change – something that would be unusual – something where there would be a diminution of ferocity, and yet perhaps a change to comparative weakness – as a man is feebler than a lion.

(e) The giving to it of a mans heart: and a man heart was given to it. The word heart in the Scriptures often has a closer relation to the intellect or the understanding than it new has commonly with us; and here perhaps it is a general term to denote something like human nature – that is, there would be as great a change in the case as if the nature of the lion should be transformed to that of a man; or, the meaning may be, that this mighty empire, carrying its arms with the rapidity of an eagle, and the fierceness of a lion, through the world, would be checked in its career; its ferocity would be tamed, and it would be characterized by comparative moderation and humanity. In Dan 4:16, it is said of Nebuchadnezzar, Let his heart be changed from mans, and let a beasts heart be given unto him; here, if the symbol refers to him, it does not refer to that scene of humiliation when he was compelled to eat grass like a beast, but to the fact that he was brought to look at things as a man should do; he ceased to act like a ravenous beast, and was led to calm reflection, and to think and speak like a man – a rational being. Or, if it refers to the empire of Babylon, instead of the monarch, it would mean that a change had come over the nation under the succession of princes, so that the fierceness and ferocity of the first princes of the empire had ceased, and the nation had not only closed its conquests, but had actually become, to some extent, moderate and rational.

Now, in regard to the application of this symbol, there can be but little difficulty, and there is almost no difference of opinion among expositors. All, or nearly all, agree that it refers to the kingdom of Babylon, of which Nebuchadnezzar was the head, and to the gradual diminution of the ferocity of conquest under a succession of comparatively weak princes. Whatever view may be taken of the book of Daniel whether it be regarded as inspired prophecy composed by Daniel himself, and written at the time when it professes to have been, or whether it be supposed to have been written long after his time by some one who forged it in his name, there can be no doubt that it relates to the head of the Babylonian empire, or to that which the head of gold, in the image referred to in Dan. 2, represents. The circumstances all so well agree with that application, that, although in the explication of the dream Dan 7:16-27 this part of it is not explained – for the perplexity of Daniel related particularly to the fourth beast Dan 7:19, yet there can be no reasonable doubt as to what was intended. For

(a) the lion – the king of beasts – would accurately symbolize that kingdom in the days of Nebuchadnezzar – a kingdom occupying the same position among other kingdoms which the lion does among other beasts, and well represented in its power and ferocity by the lion. See the character and position of this kingdom fully illustrated in the notes at Dan 2:37-38.

(b) The eagles wings would accurately denote the rapid conquests of that kingdom – its leaving, as it were, its own native domain, and flying abroad. The lion alone would have represented the character of the kingdom considered as already having spread itself, or as being at the head of other kingdoms; the wings of the eagle, the rapidity with which the arms of the Babylonians were carried into Palestine, Egypt, Assyria, etc. It is true that this symbol alone would not designate Babylon anymore than it would the conquests of Cyrus, or Alexander, or Caesar, but it is to be taken in the connection in which it is here found, and no one can doubt that it has a striking applicability to Babylon.

(c) The clipping or plucking of these wings would denote the cessation of conquest – as if it would extend no farther; that is, we see a nation once distinguished for the invasion of other nations now ceasing its conquests; and remarkable, not for its victories, but as standing at the head of all other nations, as the lion stands among the beasts of the forest. All who are acquainted with history know that, after the conquests of that kingdom under Nebuchadnezzar, it ceased characteristically to be a kingdom distinguished for conquest, but that, though under his successors, it held a pre-eminence or headship among the nations, yet its victories were extended no further. The successors of Nebuchadnezzar were comparatively weak and indolent princes – as if the wings of the monster had been plucked.

(d) The rising up of the lion on the feet, and standing on the feet as a man, would denote, not inappropriately, the change of the kingdom under the successors of Nebuchadnezzar. See above in the explanation of the symbol.

(e) The giving of a mans heart to it would not be inapplicable to the change produced in the empire after the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and under a succession of comparatively weak and inefficient princes. Instead of the heart of the lion – of being lion-hearted – it had the heart of a man; that is, the character of wildness and fierceness denoted by an untamed beast was succeeded by what would be better represented by a human being. It is not the character of the lion changed to that of the bear, or the panther, or the leopard; nor is it man considered as a warrior or conqueror, but man as he is distinguished from the wild and ferocious beast of the desert. The change in the character of the empire, until it ceased under the feeble reign of Belshazzar; would be well denoted by this symbol.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Dan 7:4-28

And four great beasts came up from the sea.

The Four Beasts

I. THE ELEMENT OUT OF WHICH THE WORLD–KINGDOMS CAME INTO EXISTENCE. Four beasts came up from the sea. The sea, when looked at in some of its aspects, is a most fit symbol of the means by which human kingdoms without godliness have made progress in the world.

1. There is the element of treachery. The sea is at one moment calm, and apparently harmless; and the next, sending a nation into mourning by overwhelming her vessels and casting their crews into the depths of the ocean.

2. The element of restless change. From its creation to the present moment its waters have not been at rest for a single hour.

3. The element of destructiveness. The sea is a terribly destroying power. The Babylonian, Persian, Macedonian, and Roman empires were destructive rather than constructive forces in the world.

II. THE CREATURES WHICH ARE USED AS SYMBOLS OF THE WORLDKINGDOMS. Four beasts. The characteristics of these kingdoms were animal rather than human. There is no true humanity where there is no divinity. These kingdoms of the parabolic vision are symbolised by beasts of prey noted for their strength, and cruelty, and treachery; no animal of a gentle, peaceful nature is found among them; denoting the entire absence of these characteristics in kingdoms without godliness.

III. THE KINGDOM THAT AROSE LAST OUT OF THE SEA OF TIME, EXCEEDED THOSE THAT HAD GONE BEFORE IT IN CRUELTY AND POWER. No mere animal could set forth all its destructive power; it had iron teeth and ten horns. The longer wickedness goes on unchecked the more its evil tendencies develops themselves, and the more it spreads desolation in the world.

IV. A TRULY HUMAN KINGDOM CANNOT ARISE OUT OF ANY ELEMENT OF EARTH, IT MUST COME FROM ABOVE. The Son of man came with the clouds of heaven. The head of every kingdom except Christs Kingdom has been a mere man. But the Son of man was from above, and He came to be the head of a kingdom of true humanity. The subjects of His Kingdom become partakers of the Divine natural, and, therefore, this kingdom exhibits none of the characteristics set forth by the beasts. It is a human kingdom because it is a Divine kingdom. Therefore, it is an everlasting kingdom. This vision teaches us:

1. The knowledge of the eternal in relation to human affairs in the ages to come.

2. That God has stretched a measuring line across the bounds of every kingdom. He has appointed the bound of their habitation.

3. Human kingdoms form a dark background to reveal the beauties of the Kingdom of Christ. (Outlines by London Minister.)

The Symbolical Beasts

Let us first attend to the place from which these beasts seemed to issue. It appeared to the prophet that they came up from the sea. We are not to interpret this literally. The sea, here, represents or symbolises something else, and, in a subsequent verse, we are told that it signifies the earth. These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. Now the word earth is often to be understood, not of this material globe, but of its inhabitants, as in that passage of Jeremiah, O earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord. And that in Psalms, Make a joyful noise unto the Lord all the earth; make a loud noise, and rejoice and sing praise. In this passage it is also to be understood of the inhabitants of the earth, or human society. When, therefore, these kings are said to rise out of the earth, this signifies that they would rise up out of the social state. But these beasts did not simply come out of the sea, when they rose out of it the sea was in a very marked condition. The four winds were striving upon it. Since the sea is the emblem of society, the sea, with the four winds striving thereon, is to be understood of society in a state of very great and violent commotion. Now, whereas the sea is represented as being in this state, when the several beasts came out of it, this clearly intimates that these kingdoms would arise amid great commotions, and that, compared with what was to follow, society might be said to continue in this state, and the earth to have no rest, until this extensive prophecy was fulfilled. In particular, we find the great empires, here predicted, rising to ascendancy amid the hurricanes of civil commotion, and convulsing the world by the shock of their fall. The four beasts which came up out of the sea signified four kings. These four beasts are four kings that shall arise out of the earth. In this passage the word king is of equal significance with the word kingdom. This is evident from verse 22, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms. Here the fourth beast is called the fourth kingdom, which undoubtedly implies that the three preceding beasts were three kingdoms. Whereas these kingdoms are symbolised by beasts, this was probably intended to describe the qualities by which they would be distinguished. It seems to intimate that all these governments, as to their principles and aims, who would be more characterised by what was common to man with the inferior creation than by those principles which connect, and ally, and link him to creatures holding a higher place in the ascending scale of existence. They are not simply represented by beasts, but by beasts of prey, by the lion, and the bear, and the leopard, and another beast which was dreadful, and terrible, and strong exceedingly. Now beasts of prey are principally distinguished from ethers by two things, they are strong and fierce, they take by violence and use with cruelty. And do not these symbols prove their own divinity? For what has been the character of all the great monarchies since the time of Daniel, as developed in their public character? May not a great part of their history be summed up in this, that they were strong and fierce, that they acquired dominion by violence, and used it in oppression? When brought to the test have not all governments accounted might to be right? Have not nations, up to this date, been known to one another principally as military establishments? Is not the history of empires a history of wars, murders, rapine, and desolation? If there be any variation in these murderous annals, it is when force gives place to policy and intrigue; it is, however, the wild beast still, though crouching in concealment, in order that he may spring unexpectedly upon his unprepared victim. Violence and fraud have been characteristic of every government that has risen hitherto upon the earth, even when individual rulers were personally of good character, and arts, commerce, and science were encouraged. There never was an instance of a government acting steadily on the great principles of truth and holiness. These beasts were four in number, and represented four kingdoms that were to arise upon the earth. That these were the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires is evident from a variety of considerations. In the first place, the symbols, here employed, will be found inapplicable to any other connected chain of history. An individual king may be found to whom some of the symbols apply, but a succession of four monarchies rising after one another will nowhere be found to which these words can with any plausibility be referred. In the second place, the application of the symbols to these four empires is so easy and natural as to show that the former were designedly employed to represent the latter. In the third place, this will appear from a comparison of the seventh with the second chapter of Daniel. These two chapters evidently refer to the same subject. Four kingdoms are symbolised in the second chapter, four kingdoms are symbolised in the seventh. In both chapters these kingdoms are represented as extending down to the period when God would erect His kingdom on the earth. In the second chapter the fourth kingdom is represented as being one of irresistible strength. In the seventh chapter it is described as being dreadful, and terrible, and strong exceedingly. The fourth kingdom, in the second chapter, is represented in its latter stages by ten toes. In the seventh chapter its last form is symbolised by ten horns. There cannot remain, on any mind capable of weighing evidence, the faintest doubt that the second and the seventh chapters relate to the same subject. This being ascertained, it is easy to prove, from the second chapter, that the four kingdoms must be understood of the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires. In the second chapter the head of gold denoted the first monarchy; but Daniel said unto Nebuchadnezzar, Thou art this head of gold; the Babylonian empire was, therefore, the first of these kingdoms. Now, in the second chapter, the four empires are symbolised by one image. They must, therefore, have come after one another in the order of immediate succession. The other three kingdoms, then, must signify the three great empires which immediately succeeded that of Babylon. But it is matter of undeniable and immutable fact that the empire of Babylon was succeeded by those of Persia, Greece, and Rome; the Babylonian having been overthrown by the Persian, the Persian being overthrown by the Grecian, and the Grecian being overthrown by the Roman. Notwithstanding of certain minor exceptions that have been stated against it, we regard this theory as one at which we have arrived by the sound and simple exposition of the sacred text itself, and which has been tested by time and proved to be genuine. But while the fate of empires is concealed from man, it is naked and open to the eyes of God. Kingdoms rise and fall by Divine ordination: Surely their days are determined, the number of their months is with God, he hath appointed them a bound which they cannot pass. And, from the book of His immutable decrees, it is easy for Him to transcribe any page of the future with as much exactness as the historian can describe transactions that are past. But why, it may be asked, are only these four empires pointed out the prophecy? Why does the Holy Seer confine His revelations to this limited district of the world? Beyond it were myriads of the human race, and old and mighty dynasties, were then existing, elsewhere, or were afterwards to arise. Why in this symbolical representation of empire are not India and China included? Why are the two great continents of Africa and America wholly omitted? For this limitation we may venture to assign two reasons, not indeed drawn by exposition from the Scriptures, but drawn by exposition from the oracles of Providence. From what we see of His actual doings by means of these empires, we are perfectly safe in asserting that they occupy the sole place in these predictions on two accounts:

1. Because they were to exercise the greatest influence upon the church during the period to which this prophecy refers.

2. Because through them God intended to civilize and Christianize the whole earth. It is a fact which will not be denied that these empires have had the principal effect upon the church for good or for evil In the days of Daniel, the church existed only within the limits of the Chaldean empire. Afterwards, we find it within the Persian empire. Then we find it principally connected with the Grecian monarchy, favoured by the great Alexander, and persecuted by more than one of his successors. In the latter days of the Jewish dispensation, we find the Old Testament church connected with the empire of Rome. It was by Rome that Jerusalem was destroyed, and the Jews driven into exile. The place of their dispersion, and the scone of their sufferings, during a period of nearly eighteen centuries, has been almost exclusively within the limits of the four prophetic monarchies. Within this district the Son of God became incarnate and was crucified. Here the fires of persecution blazed most fiercely against His devoted witnesses. Here the great apostacy from the truth was generated. This district was the battlefield between Christ and anti-Christ during many generations. It is the centre still of all the contests between light and darkness, between God and Satan. It is thus a fact that these four empires have had most effect upon the church for good or for evil; and, therefore, we seem warranted in concluding that they alone are mentioned in these predictions, because of the influential connection in which they were to stand to the church. And it is not less true that these four empires have had the principal effect in the Christianization and civilization of the other districts of the world. Beyond the limits of these monarchies, the four winds have striven on the great sea. There have been wars, and changes, and conquests, but, unless we greatly mistake the matter, there is a very marked difference between the political commotions and changes which took place within the territorial limits of the four empires and those which occurred elsewhere. Beyond this district, we will see one great conqueror after another sweeping over the earth in the same murderous career. But we see no permanent current of civilization following these commotions. We see no advancement amid all these changes. We see the nations living in the same barbarous, or semicivilized, condition in which they were in the times of Daniel. But the commotions which have occurred within the limits of the four monarchies have had a civilizing tendency in the issue. Not to ascend higher, wherever the Romans carried their arms, they carried their noble literature, and left a seed of it behind. Their later conquests were preparatory to the dissemination of the gospel; and to the fourth empire, as the Divine instrument, may be traced the whole of European civilization. Look beyond the limits of these four empires, and wherever we see civilization it will be found to have come from them. Civilization and religion went from them to America, to Greenland, Australia, the isles of the Pacific, and to many spots in Africa. And there can now be little doubt that by means of the fourth empire, in its last form, and of the church within it, God intended to originate those movements which shall result in the Christianization of the world. How thankful should we be unto God that we have been born within the limits of these four monarchies, not merely because the currents of civilization flow there, but because of the streams of life by which they are watered and fertilized. How great and glorious does God appear in connection with this prophecy! How low should we lie in the dust before Him, under a profound feeling of the nothingness of our intellects, when we see His omniscient eye piercing the vista of ages and generations, and unfolding the end from the beginning! When we survey the long and dreary domination of the four predicted beasts, we are apt to be seized with a feeling of despondency. Why has wickedness been permitted to exult so long? But when we remember that the Lord reigneth, and that the past stages of the world are merely preparatory to its future glory, a prospect opens on our view delightful beyond all description. If rays of the Divine glory are seen sparkling out amid the eras that are past, we are prepared for the announcement that, when the work is completed, the glory of the Lord will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea. (W. White.)

Vision, of Four Wild Beasts

The first of these is the Babylonian empire. In the dream of Nebuchadnezzar its symbol was the head of gold, and in the dream of Daniel, the first wild beast which was like a lion and had eagles wings. The superior excellence of the head of gold to the silver, brass, and iron of the colossal image corresponds with the superior excellence of the first wild beast, which had the body of the king of beasts and the wings of the king of birds, to the three other wild beasts which came up afterwards out of the sea. A royal dignity belonged to the Babylonian empire which was lacking in its successors. It is true that when Daniel had his dream the Babylonian empire was near its end; but as the stand-point of Daniel in the dream was before the wild beasts came up out of the sea, the interpreter justly spoke of then to Daniel as four kings which shall arise out of the earth. In the dream the Babylonian empire was yet to come; but in point of fact it had already come, and was on the eve of passing away. In the plucking of the wild beasts wings, which deprived it of its soaring ambition, and in lifting it up from the earth and giving to it a mans attitude and heart, which deprived it of the voracious nature of the wild beasts, there seems to be a reference to the madness and restoration of Nebuchadnezzar. The Judgment which humbled and ennobled the great king, paved the way for the overthrow of the first great world-power. The empire after the restoration of Nebuchadnezzar had never been so glorious; but the change wrought in him had deprived it of the conquering and destructive power of the wild beast. The lion-like ferocity and eagle-like swiftness in pouncing upon the nations had given place to the kindliness and consideration of a brother man. And when the great king died the glory had departed. None of his successors had either his genius or his strength and nobility of spirit; and in twenty-three years the Babylonian empire had ceased to be. The second world-empire is the Medo-Persian. Three reasons seem to place this opinion, which has been common in all ages, on a solid and immovable foundation.

(1) It is historically true. It is admitted on all hands that the empire which succeeded the Babylonian was the Medo-Persian. To suppose, as the higher critics generally do, that the kingdom meant in both dreams is a kingdom of the Medes, is to ascribe to them a grave historical blunder, since the kingdom of the Medes lost its separate existence and became a part of the dominion of Cyrus eleven years before the downfall of the Babylonian empire.

(2) It is the empire meant in the sacred narrative. This seems clear from the following facts. In his interpretation of the mysterious writing which portended the doom of Babylon, Daniel says of one of the words which suggested the Persians: Perez: thy kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians (v. 28). It is no doubt true that Darius the Mede is mentioned as the first king; but then it is to be noted, not only that Darius the Mede received the kingdom, but that he and his councillors regarded the edict as unalterable, according to the law, of the Medes and Persians Dan 6:8; Dan 6:12; Dan 6:15).

(3) It is the only empire which fits the symbols. The symbol of the second empire in Nebuchadnezzars dream is the breast and arms of silver. The symbol is emblematic of its inferiority to the first empire, represented by the head of gold, and the two arms are the two people who composed it. Its symbol in Daniels dream is the second wild beast, like to a bear, raised upon one side, with three ribs between its teeth, to which it was said, Arise, devour much flesh. The Medo-Persian empire, like the bear, was powerful and destructive; one of its two people, the Persians, like one of the sides of the bear, was more prominent than the other; it had in its grasp, like the bear with the three ribs in its mouth, the three kingdoms of Babylon, Lydia, and Egypt; and it was sluggish, like the bear, and needed to be stimulated in its destructive voracity. The Medo-Persian empire fits exactly both symbols, while the empire of the Medes fits neither. On these three grounds it seems certain that the second empire symbolised in the two dreams was the Mede-Persian. The third world-empire is the Greek or Macedonian. Its symbol in the dream of Nebuchadnezzar is the belly and thighs of brass; in the dream of Daniel, a leopard with four heads and four wings. The leopard is a fierce animal, remarkable for its swiftness and agility. When the prophet wished to impress his fellow-countrymen with the exceeding swiftness of the horses of the Chaldeans, he described them as swifter than leopards (Hab 1:8). This quality of swiftness is here intensified by the leopard having the four wings of a bird. The lion, the symbol of the Babylonian empire, had only two wings; but the leopard, the symbol of the Macedonian, had four. The exceeding swiftness of such a wild beast is an emblem of Alexander the Great in his conquering career. The rapidity of his military movements was not only superior to those of Nebuchadnezzar and of Cyrus, but perhaps unexampled in the history of the world. The four heads of the leopard represent the four kingdoms into which the Macedonian empire was divided after Alexanders death. The third wild beast seems in every, respect an apt symbol of the Macedonian empire. The higher critics generally, on the other hand, take the third wild beast to be a symbol of the Persian empire. I have already given three reasons for thinking that the second wild beast must be intended for the Medo-Persian empire. After the Babylonian empire there was neither a Median nor a Persian empire, but only a Medo-Persian empire; and if the second wild beast refers to the Medo-Persian empire, then the third wild beast must refer to the Macedonian empire, which immediately came, after it. But in addition, the third wild beast is not an apt symbol of the Medo-Persian empire. The four-winged leopard might be looked upon as a fit symbol of Cyrus, though not nearly so apt as a symbol of Alexander the Great, either for rapidity or ferocity; but it is altogether inappropriate to the general character of the Medo-Persian empire. Instead of being like a four-winged leopard, it strikingly resembled the awkward, slow-moving bear. Again, the four heads are not satisfactorily explained of the Medo-Persian empire by supposing that they refer either to its universal dominion–the four heads being understood as the four points of the compasstowards which the empire spread–or to four of its rulers. The heads naturally suggest kings or kingdoms, and the four heads being on the beast at one and the same time suggest four contemporaneous, and not four successive kings. The fourth world-empire is the Roman. The fourth wild beast, as it appeared to Daniel in the dream, is said to be terrible and powerful, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with its feet: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. There are two striking points of resemblance between this symbol and that of the fourth empire in Nebuchadnezzars dream. One is, that both have iron as a characteristic feature. The fourth wild beast had great iron teeth, and the fourth or lowest part of the colossal image was iron; and as iron was an emblem of a breaking and subduing power, it strikingly shadows forth the Roman empire. The other is, that both were marked by the number ten. The fourth beast had ten horns, and the iron portion of the image ten toes. The ten horns and the ten toes represent the ten kingdoms into which the Roman empire would be divided; and here, as elsewhere in Scripture, the definite number ten seems to be used in an indefinite sense for a great many. But while an apt symbol for the divided Roman empire, the number ten seems totally inapplicable to the Grecian empire, which is the favourite view of the higher critics. We come now to what is said about the Little Horn. I considered, says Daniel, the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another horn, a little one, before which three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots; and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things. He says also in the 21 and 22nd verses: I beheld, and the same 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. The general opinion of the higher critics is that the little horn is a symbol for Antiochus Epiphanes, one of the Grecian kings of Syria (175 B.C-164 B.C.), and the arch-persecutor of the Jewish people. But this empire cannot be correct if, as we have already tried to show, the fourth world-empire is the Roman. Ahtiochus Epiphanes belongs to the third world-empire, and not to the fourth. Besides, there are two things in the symbol which show that it could not refer to Antiochus Epiphanes. One is, that the little horn canto up after the ten horns, and was distinct from them. Antiochus, on the other hand, was one of the ordinary kings of Syria. His kingship was not distinct from those of the divided empire. The other is, that the little horn rooted out three of the ten. There is nothing corresponding, or approaching to, this in the history of Antiochus Epiphanes. The little horn means, I have no doubt, Papal Rome. In the fifth century of our era the Roman empire was broken up by the invasion of northern hordes; and amongst the kingdoms into which it was divided the church in Rome, with its bishop, sprang into existence as one of the kingdoms of the empire. This took place in 755 A.D., when Pepin, king of the Franks, granted to the Pope for a temporal dominion the Ex-archate of Ravenna, the Pentapolis, and the Duchy of Rome; and so, according to the prophetic dream, the new kingdom came up after the other ten. It was also a little horn, whether you look at the church in Rome as an ecclesiastical body or at the temporal dominion with which it was invested. The States of the Church, even with the Dukedom of Spoleto, which Charlemagne added in 774 A.D., formed only the central part of the Italian peninsula. In 1870 these States were lost to the Church of Rome, and in 1871 formally annexed to the kingdom of Italy, while the Italian parliament agreed to allow the Pope to live in the Vatican as a sovereign, not subject to the laws of the land, and to grant him an annual appanage of nearly three and a quarter million of lires. So far, then, as temporal dominion is concerned, the Pope has always been a little horn. Again, Papal Rome, like the little horn, is diverse from the other horns of the empire, inasmuch as the spiritual power is combined with the temporal, the ecclesiastical with the political. Another thing noted of the little horn is, that before it three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots. This also is true of Papal Rome. Of the various opinions as to what the three extinguished sovereignties were, I am inclined to adopt that of Sir Isaac Newton, that they were the kingdom of the Lombards, the Ex-archate of Ravenna which represented the dominion of the Byzantine emperors, and the Duchy of Rome. Gibbon, in the forty-fifth chapter of his great work, says: during a period of two hundred years, Italy was unequally divided between the kingdom of the Lombards and the Ex-archate of Ravenna. And there can be no doubt that it was the Pope, by means of Pepin and Charlemagne, who put down these two sovereignties in the empire. The Duchy of Rome, which he also plucked up by the roots, though small in size, was yet, on account of its prominence and importance in the empire, well entitled to be represented as one of the ten horns. And it is a memorable and suggestive fact that the Pope, alone of all sovereigns, wears a triple crown. Again, Daniel says of the little horn: Behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows. The eye is the symbol of intelligence, and the eyes of a man in the little horn imply that it would be distinguished amongst the kingdoms of the world for its subtle and astute diplomacy. Its intelligence would be that of a man as compared with that of a wild beast. And such extraordinary intelligence has been a distinguishing feature in the worldly policy of Papal Rome. Its diplomacy is unrivalled for duplicity and craft. And no worldly power ever approached it for speaking great swelling words of vanity. This is what is said to the Pope at his coronation: Receive the tiara ornamented by the three crowns, and know that you are the father of bishops and kings, the earthly governor of the world, the vicar of our Saviour Jesus Christ to whom be honour, world without end. Another feature of the little horn, which belongs also to Papal Rome, is its persecution of the people of God. I beheld, says Daniel (v. 21), and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them. In interpreting this, the angel said to Daniel (v. 25): And he shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High; and he shall think to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand until a time, and times, and half a time. There is no need to enlarge upon the persecutions of the Papacy, as there is no land in Christendom whose soil has not been stained with the blood of the martyrs which she has shed. Happily its power to persecute is for the present, at least to a large extent, taken away. The next thing in the dream is the doom which was to befall the little horn. First of all, there is the sitting of the Heavenly court on the conduct of the little horn (v. 9, 10). There are judgment days in Heaven continually occurring with regard to human affairs. After the destruction of the little horn, the world-wide empire of the Messiah begins. Daniel thus continues his dream (v. 13, 14). (T.Kirk.)

The Vision of the Four Beasts

Let us attempt to get at the practical and permanent principles which underlie this remarkable prophecy, and which are at once profoundly suggestive and exceedingly important.

1. The terribly significant truth, that earthly power, in and of itself, degenerates into brutality. The appropriate symbol of a great empire is a wild beast. The kingdoms of the earth have stood on military conquest. Might has taken the place of right. The sword has been the arbiter of imperial dynasties, and the struggles between rival powers have been as fierce and destructive as the contentions of wild animals in the jungle.

2. The tendency of this brutality is to increase. Note the order in which the four beasts are set. Bad as the Babylonians were, they were outdone by the Persians; these were exceeded by the Greeks; while the Romans were the worst of all. Note that all this while the nations were growing in what has been called culture and civisation. This was a merely superficial thing, and served only to veneer the rottenness and cruelty which were beneath.

3. The restoration of man to humanity must come, not from himself, but from above. He who introduced the healing salt which is yet to purify thoroughly the bitter fountain of our earthly life was sent forth from the ancient of days. There are few more striking arguments for the Divine origin of the Gospel, and the deity of its author, than that which may be drawn from the contrast between the character of Jesus and that of His age. Surely, the hope of the world lies in the diffusion of the Gospel of Christ. Wherever the Gospel goes in power, it restores men to humanity by bringing them back to God. Civilisation without the Gospel is only a veneered brutality. (William M. Taylor, D.D.)

Daniels First Vision

This first vision of Daniel is confessed on all hands to be an expansion of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzars dream had represented human empire in its intelligent, well-proportioned might. It was mans power as formed, in some measure, in the image of God. The substance, the strength, the character of the several empires were different; the form was one. Daniels vision exhibits them on another side. The four winds of Heaven are driving upon the great sea, that representative, throughout Holy Scripture, of our troubled world, and out of it there arise forms of more than human strength. The terrific and wasting power of the world-empires is exhibited under the symbol of brute force. A sort of unity is given to them, in that they are all exhibited at first to the prophets eye at once. God shows them to him first, as He Himself sees all things, at once; then, as they arose in fact, succeeding one another. Nor did they arise of their own power. Not without being acted upon by the winds of Heaven does the sea send forth those beasts; not without being set in motion by the powers above, does the heathen world form itself into those great empires (Hoffmann.) As the Babylonian empire had been exhibited to Nebuchadnezzar under the symbol of the richest metal, gold, so now to Daniel under that of the solid strength of the king of beasts of prey, with the swiftness of the royal bird, the eagle. Jeremiah and Ezekiel had likened Nebuchadnezzar to both. The second beast, the bear, corresponds with the solid, heavy, chest of Nebuchadnezzars statue. The twofold division and the relative strength of the two sides recur in this symbol also. It lifts itself heavily, in contrast to the winged rapidity of the Chaldean conquests. The three ribs in its mouth correspond accurately to the three kingdoms which the Medo-Persian empire swallowed up, the Lydian, Babylonian, and Egyptian. It is bidden, Arise devour much flesh, in conformity with the greedy character of the animal: waste of human life was a characteristic of the Persian empire in its heavy aggressiveness. Heaviness was, after Cyrus, the characteristic of its wars. Of the third empire, the characteristics are insatiableness of conquest, and swiftness, and fourfold division. The panther, an animal insatiable above every other beast of prey, gifted with a swiftness which scarce any prey can escape, is represented yet further with four wings. The subdivision of the empire is indicated by its four heads. Its colour corresponds to the brass of the image, its swiftness to the activity of the loins and thighs of the image. Probably the multiplication of the heads was a symbol of circumspection, of manifold, versatile intelligence. But, again, the chief object of interest in the vision is the fourth empire. For the living creature which can represent it there is no name. In the former beasts, says Jerome, there are single tokens of terribleness, in this, there are all. Of this last empire Daniel sees not only certain characteristics, but a history. Intervals of its history are marked. It embraces a long period. Its characteristic is stupendous strength. Permanent subdual characterised the Roman empire, but it had not the power of consolidating into one the disjointed materials of its greatness. The period after the destruction of the whole fourth kingdom is indicated by the words: And the rest of the beasts, the other kingdoms, had their dominion taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time (v. 12). This sentence seems to relate to a time after the destruction of the fourth empire, but this, being still future, we cannot explain certainly. The chief object of interest, that chiefly expanded, is that in which all the kingdoms end–the Kingdom of God victorious over the evil of the world . . . It is a sublime picture; man, with his keen intellect, a look more stout than his fellows, overthrowing kings, doing his own will, speaking against God, placing himself over against Him as His antagonist, having, for a set time, all things in his hand; and above, out of sight, God enthroned in the serenity of His majesty, surrounded by the thousands of heavenly beings who serve Him; and near Him, One in human form, born of a human birth, yet, like God, above in the clouds of Heaven, the darkness shrouding Him from human eye, but reigning and to reign for ever, His Kingdom neither to pass away by decay, nor to be destroyed by violence. God is patient, because He is eternal. Below, all is tumult; above, all is tranquility; the Heavenly King over against the earthly potentate, until the last blasphemy draws down His lightnings upon him, the voice of his great word ascends, the judgment, of God descends. (E. B. Pusey, D.D.)

The First Two Visions of the Book of Daniel

Two emblems are here used to describe the corruption of human states in past ages, the great image and the four beasts of prey. False religion and worldly ambition, with its natural fruits of cruelty and crime, are vividly portrayed by this twofold emblem. The redemption of man from this twofold fall must begin with their separate members. Let us, therefore, trace, from the emblems themselves, the bright and holy contrast which is waiting to be realised in the coming Kingdom of God.

1. Man, in his state of nature, is dead in trespasses and sins. In the symbols of the prophecy he is an atom of the dazzling, but lifeless image; a member incorporated in the wild beast of prey. The first work of redemption is to deliver him from this state. The bestial nature is then crucified and done away; and he becomes a living member of the body of Christ. He is no longer a lifeless atom of clay in the feet of the image. The breath of a new life has been breathed into his nostrils, and, like Adam in the day of creation, he stands once mere erect in the image of God.

2. The prophecy leads us to contemplate the true character and blessedness of a righteous nation. The closing part of those visions teaches us:

(1) The intense reality of Gods providence here below.

(2) The true standard of national excellence and honour. Not wealth and riches. Not military ambition. Not the cold and heartless theories of political ungodliness; but ordinances of royalty and righteous dominion. (T. R. Birks, M.A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 4. The first was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings] Bp. Newton well remarks, that these great beasts, as explained by the angel, Da 7:17, are kingdoms. They arise out of a stormy and tempestuous sea; that is, out of the wars and commotions of the world; and they are called great in comparison of other states and kingdoms, and are denominated beasts for their tyrannical and cruel oppression.

These four beasts are indeed monstrous productions; a lion with eagle’s wings; a bear with three ribs in its mouth; a leopard with four wings, and four heads; and a beast with ten horns. But such emblems and hieroglyphics were usual among the eastern nations, as may be seen in the monuments of antiquity. A winged lion, and such like fictitious animals, may be seen in many parts of the ruins of Persepolis. Horns are attributed to beasts which naturally have none, being used in hieroglyphic writings for symbols of strength and power. And such figures are supposed to be the symbols of different nations; and are not more strange than many that are still used in heraldry. I believe the science of heraldry arose out of the knowledge gained from the symbols used in the Sacred Writings, and the little acquaintance anciently obtained of the meaning of some of the Egyptian hieroglyphics. Hence our wiverons, griffins, unicorns, with a congeries of natural and unnatural things, split eagles, two-headed swans, c., c., &c.

The beast like a lion is the kingdom of the Babylonians and the king of Babylon is compared to a lion, Jer 4:7; Isa 5:29; and is said to fly as an eagle, Jer 48:40; Eze 17:3; Eze 17:7. The lion is considered the king of the beasts, and the eagle the king of the birds; and therefore the kingdom of Babylon, which was signified by the golden head of the great image, was the first and noblest of all the kingdoms; and was the greatest then in being. The wings of the eagle denote the rapidity with which the lion-Nebuchadnezzar, made his conquests; for in a few years, by his own arms, he brought his empire to such an extent, and raised it to such a degree of eminence, as was truly surprising; and all tended to show with what propriety this eagle-winged lion is here made his emblem.

The wings thereof were plucked] Lydia, Media, and Persia, which had been provinces of the Babylonish empire, cast off the yoke, and put themselves under kings of their own. Besides, the rapidity of its conquests was stopped by its wars with the Medes and Persians; by whom it was at last conquered, and divided between Darius the Mede and Cyrus the Persian.

And it was lifted up from the earth] That is, the wings were plucked, rendered unfit for farther flight, by which it had before been lifted up from the earth; making its conquests almost with the rapidity of an eagle’s flight. In what a short time did Nebuchadnezzar, who is here chiefly intended, conquer Syria, Phoenicia, Judea, Egypt, Arabia, c.! But on his death the wings were plucked and no farther extension of the empire took place under Evil-merodach or Belshazzar, till it was lost by the latter, and became divided as we have seen above.

And made stand upon the feet as a man] This I think refers to the taming of Nebuchadnezzar’s pride. He had acted like a fierce and ravening lion. God struck him with insanity; he then lived the life of a beast, and had a beast’s heart-disposition, and habits. At last God restored him.

And a man’s heart was given to it] He became humane, humble, and pious; and in this state he appears to have died.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Lion, and eagle; one the king of beasts, the other the king of birds, for which he is called the golden head, as Dan 2:32,38. This was the Chaldean or Assyrian; whose seat was first at Babylon, after at Nineveh, and then at Babylon again.

Had eagles wings; they were swift, overrunning many countries, and brought their monarchy to a prodigious height in a short time. Thus Jeremiah prophesied, Dan 4:13,

He shall come up as clouds, his chariots shall be as a whirlwind, his horses are swifter than eagles; in the 7th verse called a

lion, and here like

clouds, whirlwinds, and eagles for swiftness, Jer 48:40; Eze 17:3.

The wings thereof were plucked; which was first in stopping the career of their victories, and after in casting them out of their kingdom, the nation was not destroyed, but their monarchy.

A mans heart was given unto it: this was truly verified in Nebuchadnezzar, after he was as a beast turned out amongst beasts, Dan 4:31-34; and finished upon his son Belshazzar for not taking warning, Dan 5:22.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

4. lionthe symbol of strengthand courage; chief among the kingdoms, as the lion among thebeasts. Nebuchadnezzar is called “the lion” (Jer4:7).

eagle’s wingsdenotinga widespread and rapidly acquired (Isa 46:11;Jer 4:13; Lam 4:19;Hab 1:6) empire (Jer48:40).

pluckedIts ability forwidespread conquests passed away under Evil-merodach, c. [GROTIUS]rather, during Nebuchadnezzar’s privation of his throne, whilederanged.

it was lifted up from theearththat is, from its grovelling bestiality.

made stand . . . as a manSolong as Nebuchadnezzar, in haughty pride, relied on his own strength,he forfeited the true dignity of man, and was therefore degraded tobe with the beasts. Da 4:16:”Let his heart be changed from man’s, and let abeast’s heart be given unto him.” But after he learned bythis sore discipline that “the Most High ruleth in the kingdomof men” (Dan 4:35; Dan 4:36),the change took place in him, “a man’s heart is given tohim; instead of his former beast’s heart, he attains man’s trueposition, namely, to be consciously dependent on God.” ComparePs 9:20.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

The first was like a lion,…. That which rose up first, the kingdom of the Babylonians, as the Syriac version expresses it; or the Assyrian monarchy, founded by Nimrod, increased by the Assyrians, and brought to its height under Nebuchadnezzar by the Babylonians and Chaldeans; this is said to be like a “lion” for its strength and power, for its greatness, dignity, and majesty; the same with the head of gold in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream; see Jer 4:7:

and had eagles’ wings; denoting the celerity and swiftness with which Nebuchadnezzar ran, or rather flew, over several kingdoms and countries, and added them to his empire; see Jer 4:13:

and I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked; it was retarded and stopped in its conquests; it could fly no further, nor make any new acquisitions; yea, it was deplumed and stripped of some of its dominions, the Medes and Persians falling off, and making war with it:

and it was lifted up from the earth; or, “with which it was lifted up from, the earth” a; with which wings it raised itself up, and lifted itself above other kingdoms and nations; but now were plucked, and could not soar aloft as formerly; its glory and majesty, power and strength, were lessened, whole provinces revolting, as in the times of Evilmerodach, Neriglissar, and Belshazzar:

and made stand upon the feet as a man; it did not fly like an eagle as before, and overrun countries, and waste them; or go upon all four, as a beast; but stood on its feet, its two hinder legs, like a man; signifying that it abated, in the reigns of the above princes, of its strength and fierceness, and became more mild and tractable, and was reduced within bounds like other kingdoms:

and a man’s heart was given to it; instead of a lion like heart, that was bold and intrepid, and feared nothing, it became weak and fearful, and timorous like the heart of man, especially in Belshazzar’s time; not only when he saw the handwriting on the wall, to which Jacchiades refers this; but when he was so fearful of Cyrus that he shut himself up in Babylon, and durst not stir out to give him battle, as Xenophon b relates; and when the city was taken, the Babylonians were obliged to deliver up their arms, employ themselves in tilling their fields, and to pay tribute to the Persians, and always salute them as their lords and masters, as the same historian c says; see Jer 51:30.

a “quibus efferebatur e terra”, Junius Tremellius, Piscator “per quas efferebatur supra terram”, Grotius. b Cyropaedia, l. 5. c. 10. c Cyropaedia, l. 7. c. 24.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

In these verses there is a description of the four beasts. – Dan 7:4. The first beasts resembled a lion with eagle’s wings. At the entrance to a temple at Birs Nimrud there has been found (Layard, Bab. and Nin.) such a symbolical figure, viz., a winged eagle with the head of a man. There have been found also images of winged beasts at Babylon (Mnter, Relig. der Bab.). These discoveries may be referred to as evidence that this book was composed in Babylon, and also as explaining the Babylonian colouring of the dream. But the representation of nations and kingdoms by the images of beasts is much more widely spread, and affords the prophetic symbolism the necessary analogues and substrata for the vision. Lions and eagles are not taken into consideration here on account of their strength, rapacity, and swiftness, but simply because they are kings among beasts and birds: “The beast rules royally like the lion, and wings its conquering royal flight high over the like the eagle” (Kliefoth). This emblem corresponds with the representation of the first kingdom with the golden head (Daniel 2). What the gold is among metals and the head among the members of the body, that the lion is among beasts and the eagle among birds.

After a time Daniel sees a change take place with this beast. The wings, i.e., the feathers by which it flies, are plucked off: it is deprived of its power of flight, so that it can no more fly conquering over the earth, or hover as a ruler over it; i.e., the kingdom will be deprived of the power of conquering, for it will be lifted up from the earth ( is Hoph., cf. Dan 4:33), and be placed on its feet as a man. The lifting up from the earth does not represent, accordingly, being taken away or blown away from the earth, not the destruction of the Chaldean kingdom (Theodrt., Hieron., Raschi, Hitzig, and others), but the raising of it up when lying prostrate on the ground to the right attitude of a human being. This change is further described by the words, “a man’s heart was given to it,” denoting that the beast-nature was transformed to that of a man. The three expressions thus convey the idea, that the lion, after it was deprived of its power of flight, was not only in external appearance raised from the form of a beast to that of a man, but also that inwardly the nature of the beast was ennobled into that of a man. In this description of the change that occurred to the lion there is without doubt a reference to what is said of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 4: it cannot, however, be thence concluded, with Hofmann and others, that the words refer directly to Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity; for here it is not the king, but the kingdom, that is the subject with reference to whose fate that event in the life of its founder was significant. Forasmuch as it was on account of his haughtiness that madness came upon him, so that he sank down to the level of the beasts of the field, so also for the same reason was his kingdom hindered in its flight over the earth. “Nebuchadnezzar’s madness was for his kingdom the plucking off of its wings;” and as when he gave glory to the Most High his reason returned to him, and then for the first time he attained to the true dignity of man, so also was his world-kingdom ennobled in him, although the continued influence of this ennobling may not be perceived from the events in the reign of his son, recorded in Daniel 5. Besides, there lies herein not only the idea of the superiority of the first world-kingdom over the others, as is represented in Daniel 2 by the golden head of the metallic image, but also manifestly the typical thought that the world-kingdom will first be raised to the dignity of manhood when its beast-like nature is taken away. Where this transformation does not take place, or where it is not permanent, there must the kingdom perish. This is the prophetic meaning, for the sake of which that occurrence in the life of the founder of the world-monarchy is here transferred to his kingdom.

Dan 7:5

The second beast. – signifies that this beast came first into sight after the lion, which also the predicates prove. expresses the difference from the first beast, the order in which it appears. The beast was like a bear. Next to the lion it is the strongest among animals; and on account of its voracity it was called by Aristotle . The words present some difficulty. They have been differently explained. The explanation of Rabbi Nathan, “and it established a dominion,” with which Kranichfeld also agrees, is not only in opposition to the , but is also irreconcilable with the line of thought. is not the indefinite article, but the numeral; and the thought that the beast established one dominion, or a united dominion, is in the highest degree strange, for the character of a united or compact dominion belongs to the second world-kingdom in no case in a greater degree than to the Babylonian kingdom, and in general the establishing of a dominion cannot properly be predicated of a beast = a kingdom. The old translators (lxx, Theod., Peshito, Saad.) and the rabbis have interpreted the word in the sense of side, a meaning which is supported by the Targ. , and is greatly strengthened by the Arabic s’thar, without our needing to adopt the reading , found in several Codd. The object to the verb is easily supplied by the context: it raised up, i.e., its body, on one side. This means neither that it leaned on one side (Ebrard), nor that it stood on its fore feet (Hvernick), for the sides of a bear are not its fore and hinder part; but we are to conceive that the beast, resting on its feet, raised up the feet of the one side for the purpose of going forward, and so raised the shoulder or the whole body on that side. But with such a motion of the beast the geographical situation of the kingdom (Geier, Mich., Ros.) cannot naturally be represented, much less can the near approach of the destruction of the kingdom (Hitzig) be signified. Hofmann, Delitzsch, and Kliefoth have found the right interpretation by a reference to Daniel 2 and 8. As in Daniel 2 the arms on each side of the breast signify that the second kingdom will consist of two parts, and this is more distinctly indicated in Daniel 8 by the two horns, one of which rose up after the other, and higher, so also in this verse the double-sidedness of this world-kingdom is represented by the beast lifting itself up on the one side. The Medo-Persian bear, as such, has, as Kliefoth well remarks, two sides: the one, the Median side, is at rest after the efforts made for the erection of the world-kingdom; but the other, the Persian side, raises itself up, and then becomes not only higher than the first, but also is prepared for new rapine.

The further expression, it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth, has also been variously interpreted. That means ribs, not sides, is as certain as that the ribs in the mouth between the teeth do not denote side-teeth, tusks, or fangs (Saad., Hv.). The in the mouth between the teeth are the booty which the bear has seized, according to the undoubted use of the word; cf. Amo 3:12; Psa 124:6; Job 29:17; Jer 51:44. Accordingly, by the ribs we cannot understand either the Persians, Medians, and Babylonians, as the nations that constituted the strength of the kingdom (Ephr. Syr., Hieron., Ros.), or the three Median kings (Ewald), because neither the Medes nor the three Median kings can be regarded as a prey of the Median or Medo-Persian world. The “ribs” which the beast is grinding between its teeth cannot be the peoples who constitute the kingdom, or the kings ruling over it, but only peoples who constitute the kingdom, or the kings ruling over it, but only peoples or countries which it has conquered and annexed to itself. The determining of these peoples and countries depends on which kingdom is represented by the bear. Of the interpreters who understand by the bear the Median kingdom, Maurer and Delitzsch refer to the three chief satrapies (Daniel 6:3 [Dan 6:2]). Not these, however, but only the lands divided between them, could be regarded as the prey between the teeth of the beast, and then Media also must be excluded; so that the reference of the words to the three satrapies is altogether inadmissible. Hitzig thinks that the reference is to three towns that were destroyed by the Medians, viz., Nineveh, Larissa, and a third which he cannot specify; v. Leng. regards the number three as a round number, by which the voracity of the beast is shown; Kranichfeld understands by the three ribs constituent parts of a whole of an older national confederation already dissolved and broken asunder, of which, however, he has no proof. We see, then, that if the bear is taken as representing the Median kingdom, the three ribs in its mouth cannot be explained. If, on the other hand, the Medo-Persian world-kingdom is intended by the bear, then the three ribs in its mouth are the three kingdoms Babylon, Lydia, and Egypt, which were conquered by the Medo-Persians. This is the view of Hofm., Ebr., Znd., and Klief. The latter, however, thinks that the number “Three” ought not to be regarded as symbolical, but as forming only the contrast to the number four in Dan 7:6, and intimating that the second beast will not devour in all the regions of the world, but only on three sides, and will make a threefold and not a fourfold plunder, and therefore will not reach absolute universality. But since the symbolical value of each number is formed from its arithmetical signification, there is no reason here, any more than there is in the analogous passages, Dan 8:4, Dan 8:22, to depart wholly from the exact signification.

The last expression of the verse, Arise, devour much flesh, most interpreters regard as a summons to go forth conquering. But this exposition is neither necessary, nor does it correspond to the relative position of the words. The eating much flesh does not form such a contrast to the three ribs in the mouth between the teeth, that it must be interpreted of other flesh than that already held by the teeth with the ribs. It may be very well understood, with Ebrard and Kliefoth, of the consuming of the flesh of the ribs; so that the command to eat much flesh is only an explication of the figure of the ribs held between the teeth, and contains only the thought that the beast must wholly consume the plunder it has seized with its teeth. The plur. ( they spoke) is impersonal, and is therefore not to be attributed to the angel as speaking.

Dan 7:6

The third beast, which Daniel saw after the second, was like a panther (leopard), which is neither so kingly as the lion nor so strong as the bear, but is like to both in rapacity, and superior to them in the springing agility with which it catches its prey; so that one may say, with Kliefoth, that in the subordination of the panther to the lion and the bear, the same gradation is repeated as that this is found (of the third kingdom) in Daniel 2 of the copper (brass). Of the panther it is said, that it had four wings of a fowl and four heads. The representation of the beast with four wings increases the agility of its movements to the speed of the flight of a bird, and expresses the thought that the kingdom represented by that beast would extend itself in flight over the earth; not so royally as Nebuchadnezzar, – for the panther has not eagle’s wings, but only the wings of a fowl, – but extending to all the regions of the earth, for it has four wings. At the same time the beast has four heads, not two only, as one might have expected with four wings. The number four thus shows that the heads have an independent signification, and do not stand in relation to the four wings, symbolizing the spreading out of the kingdom into the four quarters of the heavens (Bertholdt, Hv., Kran.). As little do the four wings correspond with the four heads in such a way that by both there is represented only the dividing of the kingdom into four other kingdoms (Hv.. Comment., Auberl.). Wings are everywhere an emblem of rapid motion; heads, on the contrary, where the beast signifies a kingdom, are the heads of the kingdom, i.e., the kings or rulers: hence it follows that the four heads of the panther are the four successive Persian kings whom alone Daniel knows (Dan 11:2). Without regard to the false interpretations of Dan 11:2 on which this opinion rests, it is to be noticed that the four heads do not rise up one after another, but that they all exist contemporaneously on the body of the beast, and therefore can only represent four contemporary kings, or signify that this kingdom is divided into four kingdoms. That the four wings are mentioned before the four heads, signifies that the kingdom spreads itself over the earth with the speed of a bird’s flight, and then becomes a fourfold-kingdom, or divides itself into four kingdoms, as is distinctly shown in Dan 8:5. – The last statement, and dominion was given to it, corresponds with that in Dan 2:39, it shall bear rule over all the earth, i.e., shall found an actual and strong world-empire.

Dan 7:7-8

The fourth beast. – Introduced by a more detailed description, the fourth beast is presented more distinctly before our notice than those which preceded it. Its terribleness and its strength, breaking in pieces and destroying all things, and the fact that no beast is named to which it can be likened, represent it as different from all the beasts that went before. This description corresponds with that of the fourth kingdom denoted by the legs and the feet of the metallic image of the monarchies (Daniel 2). The iron breaking in pieces all things (Dan 2:40) is here represented by the great iron teeth with which this monster devoured and brake in pieces. In addition to that, there are also feet, or, as Dan 7:19 by way of supplement adds, “claws of brass,” with which in the mere fury of its rage it destroyed all that remained, i.e., all that it did not devour and destroy with its teeth. ( it was made different) denotes not complete diversity of being, from which Hitz. and Del. conclude that the expression suits only the Macedonian world-kingdom, which as occidental was different in its nature from the three preceding monarchies, which shared among themselves an oriental home and a different form of civilisation and despotic government. For although expresses more than (Dan 7:5), yet the ( diverse one from another), spoken (Dan 7:3) of all the beasts, shows that cannot be regarded as expressing perfect diversity of being, but only diversity in appearance. The beast was of such terrible strength and destructive rage, that the whole animal world could furnish no representative by whose name it might be characterized. It had ten horns, by which its terrible strength is denoted, because a horn is in Scripture always the universal symbol of armed strength. With this the interpretation (Dan 7:24), that these horns are so many kings or kingdoms, fully corresponds. In the ten horns the ten toes of the image (Daniel 2) are again repeated. The number ten comes into consideration only according to its symbolical meaning of comprehensive and definite totality. That the horns are on the head of the one beast, signifies that the unfolding of its power in the ten kingdoms is not a weakening of its power, but only its full display.

Dan 7:8

Here a new event is brought under our notice. While continuing to contemplate the horns (the idea of continuance lies in the particip. with the verb. fin.), Daniel sees another little horn rise up among them, which uproots, i.e., destroys, three of the other horns that were already there. He observes that this horn had the eyes of a man, and a mouth which spake great things. The eye and the mouth suggest a human being as represented by the horn. Eyes and seeing with eyes are the symbols of insight, circumspection, prudence. This king will thus excel the others in point of wisdom and circumspection. But why the eyes of a man? Certainly this is not merely to indicate to the reader that the horn signified a man. This is already distinctly enough shown by the fact that eyes, a mouth, and speech were attributed to it. The eyes of a man were not attributed to it in opposition to a beast, but in opposition to a higher celestial being, for whom the ruler denoted by the horn might be mistaken on account of the terribleness of his rule and government; ” ne eum putemus juxta quorundam opinionem vel diabolum esse vel daemonem, sed unum de hominibus, in quo totus Satanas habitaturus sit corporaliter,” as Jerome well remarks; cf. Hofmann and Kliefoth. – A mouth which speaketh great things is a vainglorious mouth. are presumptuous things, not directly blasphemies (Hv.). In the Apocalypse, Rev 13:5, and are distinguished.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

THE FOUR BEAST EMPIRES

FIRST, NEBUCHADNEZZAR’S (Dan 2:37-38)

Verse 4 describes the first of the four living animals as a lion, a symbol of strength and courage, chief among gentile world governments, as the lion is chief or king of beasts of the forests, v. 17; Deu 28:49; Jer 48:40. The lion appears with eagle’s wings, Jer 4:7; Jer 25:9. That lion was Nebuchadnezzar who swooped like a spreadwinged eagle upon her prey, with pride and self glory, till his wings were plucked by mental derangement of recessive nature, and until he acknowledged God. He then was lifted upon his feet, upright from his beast-like, grass-eating posture, as a man dependent upon God, Isa 46:11; Lam 4:19; Dan 4:16; Dan 4:35; Dan 4:35; Psa 9:20.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

It is clear that the four monarchies are here depicted. But it is not agreed upon among all writers which monarchy is the last, and which the third. With regard to the first, all agree in understanding’ the vision of the Chaldean Empire, which was joined with the Assyrian, as we saw before. For Nineveh was absorbed by the Chaldeans and Babylonians; but the Prophet discourses at length of the Assyrian and Chaldean Empire, which was then flourishing. No one, however, would have thought it so near its end; and on the very night on which Belshazzar was slain, we saw how securely and proudly he was immersed in his pleasures, and what great and listless security existed throughout the city. This monarchy then ought to be set before us in the first place. As in the second chapter that empire was called the golden head of the statue, so also it is now called a lion; that is, it is compared to a generous animal. It is comprehended under the image of a beast, and its fierceness and atrocity, as I have said, is hereby denoted; but with respect to the other kingdom, some superiority is granted to it, since the world is always growing worse and worse. And although Cyrus was a very prudent prince, yet he did not reach the temperance of former ages; for his ambition, avarice, and cruelty were insatiable. For Isaiah also, when he speaks of the Persians, says, They desire neither silver nor gold, but thirst after human blood. (Isa 13:17.)

We perceive then the reason why the Prophet says, The first beast offered to me was like a lion, because greater integrity flourished under the Chaldeans than when all the empires were mixed together, and the Persians subdued both the Chaldeans and the Medes. For it is evident from all histories that they were a barbarous and fierce nation. They were indeed showy in their praise of virtue, since they spent their lives in austerity, and despised all luxuries, and were exceedingly temperate in their living; but their ferocity and brutal cruelty rendered them detestable. The first beast then was like a lion, says he, and had eagle ’ s wings; that is, although it was a lion, yet it had wings. This refers to its swiftness, since we know in how short a time the Assyrians increased their monarchy, for they had previously subdued the Chaldeans, just like a lion for swiftness. For a lion has force, spirit, and cruelty for committing injuries. Besides, the prophet saw a winged lion, since they not only increased their empire by their own strength, but suddenly extended their wings in every direction. We see, then, how strength and power are denoted on the one hand, and the greatest speed on the other. He afterwards adds, Their wings were dragged or torn off. For when the Chaldeans desired to stretch beyond their bounds, the Lord restrained them within due limits, and checked their continual victories. Their wings were then torn off, when God restrained them by the check of a bridle, lest they should wander as freely as they had formerly done.

The Prophet then adds, This beast was raised from the earth, implying the cessation of the empire. For neither the Chaldeans nor the Assyrians were entirely destroyed; but their glory was completely taken away. The face of the beast no longer appeared, when God transferred that monarchy to the Medes and Persians. Hence the Prophet adds, It stood upon its feet, and the heart of a man was given to it By this form of expression, he means to imply the reduction of the Assyrians and Chaldeans to their ordinary condition, and that they were no longer like a lion, but like private men deprived of their power and strength. Hence the expression, a man’s heart was given to them, is not intended by way of praise, but by “a man” he intends any private person; as if he had said, the aspect of the Chaldeans and Assyrians was no longer terrible, since, while their sway prevailed, all men dreaded their power. Hence God removed from the world the face of that beast, and substituted that of a man, and made them stand upon their feet. Formerly they flew about. in the air, and despised the earth as far beneath their feet, but God makes them stand upon their feet; that is, not conduct themselves after their customary and former manner, but simply on the common level, after God had deprived them of their empire. This, in my judgment, is the simple meaning of the Prophet. Should there be any necessity, we shall afterwards confirm the remarks which we now run through but cursorily. It follows: —

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(4) The first was like a lion.The lion and the eagle are chosen as being emblems of strength and swiftness respectively. They characterise the empire of Nebuchadnezzar, and correspond to the golden head of the Colossus (Daniel 2).

The wings . . . plucked.The eagle, deprived of its wings, loses its power of swiftness and unrestrained motion.

From the earth.The beast was raised from being on its four feet into the position of a man, as is indicated by the words a mans heart. We have not sufficient historical details respecting the last years of Nebuchadnezzars reign to enable us to point to the reference. It has been suggested by St. Jerome that the words refer to the madness of the king and to his subsequent recovery; but it must be borne in mind that it is the kingdom rather than the king of Babylon which is the subject of the vision.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

4. All expositors refer this to the Babylonian empire, which is here represented by the king of beasts as previously by the chief of metals (Dan 2:38). It has long been supposed that the lion was equipped with eagle’s wings to symbolize the swiftness with which he could swoop upon his prey; but it is more likely that the figure was taken from the innumerable representations in Assyria of winged lions with human faces as the symbol of imperial strength and divine authority. This royal symbol was well understood by the prophets (Jer 49:19; Jer 49:22; Jer 50:17; Jer 50:44). Herder suggestively remarks (1, 57), “If Daniel sees a vision in which animal forms denote kingdoms, symbolic shapes of that kind must have been no strangers to his waking world; for we dream only of forms which we see when awake and in our dreams give them new and various combinations.”

The wings thereof were plucked This probably indicates a diminution in the swiftness and aggressiveness of the Babylonian invasions before the end of the empire. Although it may possibly contain an obscure reference to the account given in Dan 4:28-36, where Nebuchadnezzar became outwardly beastly (as his whole empire had previously been), yet the cases are so dissimilar as to make even a vague reference doubtful. Most recent expositors believe that the expression and a man’s heart was given to it refers to the “humanizing of the kingdom;” although Behrmann and Thomson think, with greater probability, that it has reference to the weakening of the kingdom, since a lion’s heart has always been a symbol of strength. (Compare 2Sa 17:10.) Certainly this figure of a plucked beast lifted up and made to stand upon his [hind] feet, as a man, does not impress us as an attempt to convey the idea that this empire at this time was “the best of all” (Prince), having “superior intelligence” (Bevan) to all the empires which had preceded it; rather it vividly expresses the denuding of the empire of its natural and divinely granted powers and of its “lion heart,” and, in consequence of this, its defeat by the second beast, who immediately appears on the stage of action as the heir of its greatness. The battle between the lion and the bear and the latter’s victory is taken for granted.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Dan 7:4. The first was like a lion This is the kingdom of the Babylonians; and the king of Babylon is in like manner compared to a lion, Jer 5:6 and said to fly as an eagle, Jer 48:40. He is also compared to an eagle, Eze 3:7. The lion is esteemed the king of beasts, and the eagle the king of birds; and therefore the kingdom of Babylon, which is described as the first and noblest kingdom, and was the greatest then in being, is said to partake of the nature of both. Instead of a lion, the Vulgate, Greek, and Arabic, read a lioness; and St. Jerome observes, that the kingdom of Babylon, for its cruelty, is compared not to a lion, but to a lioness; which, naturalists assert, is the fiercer of the two. The eagle’s wings denote its swiftness and rapidity: and the conquests of Babylon were very rapid; that empire being advanced to its height within a few years by a single person, by the conduct and arms of Nebuchadnezzar. It is farther said, that the wings thereof were plucked, &c. that is to say, it was taken away from the earth, as it is commonly understood, and as it is rendered in almost all the ancient versions: or it may be translated, The wings thereof were plucked, wherewith it was lifted up from the earth; as Grotius explains it, and as we read in the margin of our Bibles; the conjunction copulative sometimes supplying the place of a relative. Its wings were beginning to be plucked at the time of the delivery of this prophesy; for at this time the Medes and Persians were incroaching upon it. Belshazzar the king, now reigning, was the last of his race; and in the seventeenth year of his reign Babylon was taken, and the kingdom transferred to the Medes and Persians. It is not easy to say what is the precise meaning of the last clause, And made stand, &c. It is most probable, that after the Babylonian empire was subverted, the people became humane and gentle; their minds were humbled with their fortunes; and they who vaunted as if they had been gods, now felt themselves to be but men. They were brought to such a sense as the inspired writer wishes, Psa 9:20. See Bishop Newton as above. Houbigant reads, And it stood upon its feet, as a man; that is, says he, before its wings were plucked; for the pride of Nebuchadnezzar is here marked out, who seemed in his own opinion to be above a man; like an animal desirous to advance itself to the human condition.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

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

Ver. 4. The first was like a lion. ] Which is the king of beasts (as the eagle is of birds), generous, strong, fierce, fair-conditioned; so were the Assyrian monarchs in comparison of those that followed them.

And had eagle’s wings.] Whereby is noted their victorious celerity and alacrity in seizing upon kingdoms. as Oba 1:4 2Sa 1:23 Jer 4:13 ; Jer 48:40 Eze 17:3

I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, ] scil., By the Medes and Persians, taming Babel’s insolence, and making her inhabitants tributaries and slaves, to till their ground and to maintain their garrisons, saluting them as their masters wherever they met them. a

And made stand upon the feet as a man, ] i.e., Brought down to the common rank of men, and no longer lift up as an eagle.

And a man’s heart b was given to it.] Which before thought itseff as good as God, now had low and common spirits; not as once, imperious and impetuous.

a Xenophon.

b Cor humanum, id est, molle ac timidum. – Piscat.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

The first, &c. Cannot be Babylon, for this had already arisen, and was within two years of its end (see notes on Dan 7:1). Daniel could not see that kingdom arise now. He had said, “Thou art this head of gold” (Dan 2:38); but Nebuchadnezzar himself had been dead twenty-three years, and these are “four kings which shall arise” (Dan 7:17). Therefore Babylon is not included.

like. These descriptions will be easily recognized by those who shall see them arise.

I beheld = I continued looking, as in verses: Dan 7:6, Dan 7:9, Dan 7:11. Same as “I saw” in verses: Dan 7:2, Dan 7:7, Dan 7:13.

till = till that.

the feet = the two feet.

man. Chaldee ‘anash. App-14.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Dan 7:4

Dan 7:4 The firstH6933 was like a lion,H744 and had eagle’sH1768 H5403 wings:H1611 I beheldH1934 H2370 tillH5705 H1768 the wingsH1611 thereof were plucked,H4804 and it was lifted upH5191 fromH4481 the earth,H772 and made standH6966 uponH5922 the feetH7271 as a man,H606 and a man’sH606 heartH3825 was givenH3052 to it.

Dan 7:4

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

The lion was a symbol of strength, boldness and bravery. The wings of eagles was a symbol of speed. In speaking of the coming of Babylon, Jeremiah wrote in Jer 4:13, “Behold, he shall come up as clouds, and his chariots shall be as a whirlwind: his horses are swifter than eagles. Woe unto us! for we are spoiled”. The plucked wings are a reference to Nebuchadnezzar’s humbling during his insanity. Being lifted up from the earth and being made to stand upon the feet as a man was the restoring of Nebuchadnezzar from his madness where he crawled around on his all fours and ate grass like an ox would. During this period of time Nebuchadnezzar had the heart of a beast. When he was restored and set back upon his feet, he was given the heart of a man. The first world kingdom in Daniel’s vision can be none other than the Babylonian Empire personified in her greatest king, Nebuchadnezzar.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

like: Deu 28:49, 2Sa 1:23, Isa 5:28, Isa 5:29, Jer 4:7, Jer 4:13, Jer 25:38, Jer 48:40, Lam 4:19, Eze 17:3, Hab 1:6-8, Mat 24:28

the wings: Dan 4:31-33, Jer 50:30-32

and it: or, wherewith it, etc

lifted: Dan 4:30, Dan 5:18-23, Isa 14:13-17, Jer 25:9-26, Hab 2:5-10

and a: Dan 4:32, Dan 4:36, Job 25:6, Psa 9:20, Eze 28:2, Eze 28:9

Reciprocal: Psa 76:4 – mountains Jer 5:6 – a lion Jer 12:17 – pluck Jer 49:22 – he shall Eze 1:10 – the face of an eagle Dan 2:32 – head Dan 7:3 – beasts Dan 7:6 – four wings Dan 7:12 – the rest Dan 7:17 – great Rev 4:7 – a flying Rev 9:7 – their faces Rev 13:2 – and his feet

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Dan 7:4. The first beast (Babylon) was like a lion which indicates strength. (See chapter 2: 37.) It bad eagle’s wings which indicates the ability to soar and cover the whole area of mankind. (See chapter 2: 38.) Man’s heart given to it signifies the beast, referred to something composed of intelligent, human beings, which was true of the Babylonian Empire.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Dan 7:4. The first was like a lion The Chaldean or Babylonian empire: compared to the head of gold, the chief of metals, in the image represented to Nebuchadnezzar in his dream, Dan 2:32; Dan 2:37-38, is here represented as a lion, the king of beasts. Instead of a lion, the Vulgate, Greek, and Arabic read, a lioness, signifying, says Jerome, the cruelty of that empire, lionesses, according to naturalists, being fiercer than lions. It is represented as having eagles wings, to denote the extent and rapidity of its conquests, that empire being advanced to its height within a few years, by the conduct and arms of one single person, namely, Nebuchadnezzar. I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked Or, torn out, as may be rendered: that is, it was checked in its progress by frequent defeats, and rendered unable to make further conquests. Its wings were beginning to be plucked at the time of the delivery of this prophecy; for at this lime the Medes and Persians were encroaching upon it. Belshazzar, the king now reigning, was the last of his race; and in the seventeenth year of his reign Babylon was taken, and the kingdom transferred to the Medes and Persians. And it was lifted up from the earth Removed from its foundation, and lost its stability: or, as some render the clause, the wings thereof were plucked, wherewith it had been lifted up from the earth, that is, had been enabled to fly swiftly, in extending its conquests; and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a mans heart was given to it When it was thus curtailed and humbled, it became more peaceable and humane, agreeably to the idea of the psalmist, Psa 9:20, Put them in fear, O Lord, that the nations may know themselves to be but men. The minds of the people were humbled by their misfortunes, and by the calamities coming more and more upon the empire; and they who vaunted as if they had been gods, now felt themselves to be but men.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

7:4 The first [was] like a {c} lion, and had eagle’s wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man’s heart was given to it.

(c) Meaning the Assyrian and Chaldean empire, which was most strong and fierce in power, and most soon to come to their authority, as though they had wings to fly: yet their wings were pulled off by the Persians, and they went on their feet, and were made like other men, which is meant here by man’s heart.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

The first beast looked like a lion, but it also had wings like an eagle. Other biblical writers had compared Nebuchadnezzar to a lion and an eagle (cf. Jer 4:7; Jer 49:19; Jer 50:17; Jer 50:44; Jer 49:22; Lam 4:19; Eze 17:3; Eze 17:12; Hab 1:8). As Daniel watched, something plucked this beast’s wings off, made it stand on two feet like a man, and gave it a human mind or nature. Many nations have used the lion as a symbol of royal power because it is the traditional king of beasts (cf. 1Ki 10:20; 2Ch 9:19). Similarly the eagle has long represented the king of birds (cf. Eze 17:3; Eze 17:7). Almost all interpreters, conservative and critical, believe this lion represents Neo-Babylonia. Huge winged lions guarded the gates of the royal Babylonian palaces. [Note: Walvoord, p. 153.] Babylon used both the lion and the eagle as national emblems (cf. Jer 4:7; Jer 4:13; Eze 17:3). The cropping of the lion’s wings may allude to the humiliation of Nebuchadnezzar (ch. 4), [Note: Leupold, pp. 289-90; Archer, "Daniel," p. 85.] or perhaps to the deterioration of his kingdom after his death. [Note: Feinberg, p. 86. Dyer, in The Old . . ., p. 713, believed Nebuchadnezzar (ch. 4) and Belshazzar (ch. 5) are in view.] After Nebuchadnezzar’s humbling by God, he became more humane. [Note: For additional study of prophecies about Babylon, see John F. Walvoord, The Nations in Prophecy, pp. 61-69.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles