Welcome back to my study/review of The Book of Daniel. If you missed the previous parts of this study, you can find them HERE.
Daniel 7:8-12
8 I considered 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.
9 “As I looked,
thrones were placed,
and the Ancient of Days took his seat;
his clothing was white as snow,
and the hair of his head like pure wool;
his throne was fiery flames;
its wheels were burning fire.
10 A stream of fire issued
and came out from before him;
a thousand thousands served him,
and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him;
the court sat in judgment,
and the books were opened.
11 “I looked then because of the sound of the great words that the horn was speaking. And as I looked, the beast was killed, and its body destroyed and given over to be burned with fire. 12 As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away, but their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.
_________________________
This is the passage from the Book of Daniel most commonly associated with the Christian idea of an antiChrist. For Jews, obviously that interpretation is a bit different and we’ll look into that as we go through the commentaries, starting with The Pulpit Commentaries and verse 8:
I considered the horns, and,behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things. The Septuagint Version, if we consider it a rendering of the Massorotic, begins really with the words which are made in it the last clause of the preceding verse, “And counsels were many in its horns.” This reading is certainly not to be preferred, although it can easily be understood how it has arisen. The version proceeds, “And behold another born sprang up in the midst of them—little in its horns”—this latter is a doublet—”and three of the former horns were rooted cut by it, and, behold, eyes as human eyes were in this horn, and a mouth speaking great things, and it made war against the saints.” Theodotion is practically in agreement with the Massoretic text, as is also the Peshitta. As Daniel is gazing, his attention is directed to the horns; he sees their appearance changing. An eleventh horn springs up, much less than any of the former ten; quickly, however, it grows, and before its growth three of the former horns are rooted up. This horn now drew his gaze from all the others: it had human eyes, it had a mouth speaking great things. In the changes of the dream the horn now seems separated from the animal on which it is; it becomes an oppressor, and makes war upon the saints. It is usual to identify this horn with that in Daniel 8:7. When carefully looked at, the alleged resemblance is reduced to the fact that in both cases “a horn” is used as a symbol of an oppressor of the saints. We must remember that, according to the figure, these ten horns are contemporary. If we take the typology of the next chapter as our guide, these horns are kingdoms or dynasties. Unlike the Greek Empire, which split up into four, this fourth empire splits up into ten. Another dynasty rises up and sweeps away three of these earlier dynasties. Nothing like this occurred in regard to the empire of the Diadochi. Of course, it is true the number ought not to be pressed, save as a designative symbol. There must, however, be more than five or six, as in such a case four would be a more natural general number. It may, however, be twelve or fifteen. Several events in the history of the kingdoms that have followed the Roman Empire might satisfy one part of this picture—the replacing of three kingdoms by one. It is a possible enough view that provinces may be referred to, as Jephet-ibn. Ali maintains. As, however, the primary significance of the “horn” is power, the most probable solution seems to us to be to take the “ten” horns as the magistracies of Republican Rome. If we reckon the magistracies, there were fewer, if we take the distinctive individuals occupying the magistracies, more, than ten. The imperial form of government replaced several of these magistracies, which may roughly be reckoned at three. Certainly of the imperial power it might be said that it had a mouth “speaking great things;” for the claim to deification made openly was certainly a new claim. Other monarchs had claimed to be the sons of their god; only the Roman emperors were addressed as divus during their lifetime. Certainly the empire made war against the saints—against the people of God. It was Nero, a Roman emperor, who decreed war against the Jews; it was Vespasian, another Roman emperor, that began the conquest of Palestine; it was Titus, a third Roman emperor, that captured Jerusalem. Some support may be found for the Jewish idea that it is Titus personally. If we are permitted to take the ten horns as successive emperors, he was the eleventh emperor, and three emperors were swept away before the Flavian dynasty. We must reserve fuller discussion of this subject to a special excursus.
As the note indicates, there is some relatively wide interpretations for what the 4th beast is, what the ten horns are, and what the little horn is – though most Christians interpret the little horn to be symbolic of the antichrist. From there though, you find quite a bit of disagreement.
If we interpret the vision from Daniel 2, of the statue, as a parallel to this vision of the four beasts, then it gets perhaps even more difficult. Daniel 7 presents the beasts as successive entities, whereas Daniel 2 indicates they are each of the same overall body – with the Babylonians being at the head.
For Christians, this is augmented by John’s vision in Revelation, where we see “the whore of Babylon” riding on the beast – as though she is directing it. That indicates a relationship between whatever “Babylon” is and whatever the beast is, but they are not necessarily like to like. In fact, one important sign in Revelation is the Whore of Babylon being turned upon, by the beast, and destroyed. (Revelation 17)
That of course begs the question of how something Babylonian will rule over the world in the latter days when Babylon no longer exists. Describing the Babylonian rulership, as a prostitute, indicates that whoever/whatever it is has committed a religious apostasy. But that’s for a Revelation study and we’re in Daniel.
Continuing on in TPC:
I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened. The Septuagint Version here does not differ much from the Massoretic save that there are two cases of-doublet. Theodotion and the Peshitta are evidently translated from a text identical with that of the Massoretic. There is, however, one point where the versions agree against the Authorized Version—the thrones are not cast down, they are “placed,” as in the Revised. Luther and most German commentators render thus, as does Jerome. Ewald translates “cast,” that is, “set.” In the third chapter, where we have the same word, it means” cast down; “this leads us to prefer the Authorized rendering. The word for “throne” is to be observed. It means not so much the throne-royal as the seat of a judge (Behrmann); but the office of judge was that essentially of the king. The Ancient of days did sit. It is not “the Ancient of days,” but “one ancient in days,” that is to say, the phrase is not appellative, but descriptive. After the thrones of these earlier kingdoms were cast down, then one appeared like an old man clad in a garment of snowy whiteness, and the hair of his head as wool. That this is a symbolic appearance of God is beyond doubt. Ewald remarks on the grandeur of the description as excelling in boldness even the vision of Ezekiel. The throne, the judgment-seat of the Ancient of days, is a chariot of “fiery flame,” with “wheels of burning fire”—a description that suggests the translation of Elijah. His throne is at once the judge’s scat and the chariot of the warrior. From beneath this chariot-throne “a fiery stream issued forth.” In the Book of Revelation (Revelation 22:1), from beneath the throne of God there issued the river of the water of life, clear as crystal Compare with this also Enoch Rev 14:9 -22. Enoch’s description is derived from this, but amplified to a great extent. Thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times tea thousand stood before him. The word “thousands” in the Aramaic has the Hebrew plural termination in the K’thib, but in the most ancient forms of Aramaic there are many points where the two tongues have not yet diverged. The symbol here is of a royal court, only the numbers are vaster than any earthly court could show. The angels of God are present to carry out the decisions of the judgment. Compare with this Enoch Revelation 1:9 (Charles’s trans), “Lo! he comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment upon them.” Those that minister unto the Judge are those whose duty it is to carry out the Divine sentence; those who stand before him are those who are spectators of this great assize. The judgment was set. This translation is not accurate. The word translated “was set” is the same as that rendered in the second clause of the preceding verse “did sit.” Again, although deena’, thus vocalized, means “judgment,” it may be differently vocalized, dayyana, and mean “Judge.” If we take the present pointing, the phrase may be taken as equivalent to “the assize began.” And the books were opened. It ought to be noted that the word here used for” books” is derived from a root primarily meaning “engrave.” The Babylonian books, as they have come down to us, are clay tablets “engraved” or “impressed” with letters. We have all manner of legal documents in this form. The piles of tiles and cylinders which contain the deeds of those before the judgment-seat stand before the Judge. One by one they are displayed before him. The scene presented is one of unspeakable grandeur, and all put before us with a few masterly strokes. We see the great fiery throne’; the Judge, awful with the dignity of unnumbered ages, attended by a million of angels who are ready to do his will; and a hundred million watching and listening spectators. We find that this description of the judgment in the first Apocalypse reappears, modified and made yet more solemn, in the last Apocalypse. We are, however, not to regard this as the final judgment. Daniel is rather admitted into the presence of God in the heavens, and sees his judgment continually being prepared against the wicked.
Starting in verse 9, Daniel then sees “the Ancient of Days” – which is a reference to God. The description given is that of a judgment. Ellicott adds the following for verse 9:
(9) I beheld.—Literally, I kept on looking, and suddenly seats were placed, on which the assessors of the Great Judge were to sit. These have been interpreted from Psalms 89:7 to be the angels, but a truer explanation is to be found in Matthew 19:28. It should be noticed that those who sat on the thrones are distinguished from the countless multitude mentioned in Daniel 7:10.
Ancient of days.—Literally, a very aged man. (Comp. Ezekiel 1:26-28.) The attribute of age expresses the majesty of the judge. (Comp. Psalms 55:19; Deuteronomy 33:27.) It may be remarked that notwithstanding the title “Ancient” is applied to the Deity, “Anou,” yet His titles, “generator and father of the gods,” are so completely at variance with Old Testament doctrines that it is inconceivable that Daniel should have incorporated in his vision any portions of Babylonian mythology. Similar remarks apply to Silik-moulou-khi, between whom and the Son of man (Daniel 7:13) a parallel has been pointed out. The conception of the former is completely different from what is revealed about the latter.
White as snow.—Indicating, like the “pure wool,” the purity and justice of the Judge.
Fiery flame.—Fire appears in Scripture sometimes as a metaphor for affliction or punishment (e.g., 1 Corinthians 3:13, &c.), sometimes as a symbol of the chastening and punitive righteousness of God (Ezekiel 1:13-14; Ezekiel 1:27-28). Elsewhere it sets forth the fiery indignation which devours the enemies of God (Hebrews 10:27; Revelation 19:11-12). The figure of speech is here used in each of these senses. The “wheels” represent the omnipresence of Almighty God.
It’s a cool scene. Continuing on in TPC to verse 11:
I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame. The Septuagint Version has been translated from the same text; but the word translated “because” is rendered τότε, “then,” according to the usual meaning of the word. Theodotion has a doublet. The Peshitta is much briefer, “I saw that this beast was slain, and its body destroyed, and it was cast into the flame of fire.” The voice of the great words; that is, blasphemies. The punishment of blasphemy among the Babylonians was burning. On account of the blasphemies of the little horn, the whole empire to which it belonged was destroyed. If we regard the fourth beast as Rome, and the little horn the imperial dignity, it was on account of its blasphemies that the empire really ceased. The blasphemous claim to divinity wrought madness in the minds of such youths as Caligula, Nero, Commodus, Caracalla, and Heliogabalus. The process might be a slow one. God had his purpose in the history of the race to work out by the Roman Empire; yet it was none the less the madness of the emperors that brought the empire down. The way the provinces were harried by barbarians East and West could well be described as burning the body of it with fire.
The little horn and the beast to which it is associated (the 4th) are destroyed. Some would interpret this as the end of the Romans. However, other interpretations argue that the Seleucid Empire is the 4th empire. This empire was born out of the Greek Empire started by Alexander the Great, however, Daniel may have considered it a 4th and separate entity in its own right. This would have been the empire occupying the Holy Land prior to the Romans, when many scholars believe Daniel was written (the 2nd century B.C.) Thus the “little horn” figure could be seen as an allusion to Antiochus Epiphanes – who was a famous Seleucid leader and enemy of 2nd Temple period Jews.
Finishing out the section, continuing in TPC:
As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time. The version of the LXX. has a different reference, “And those about him he took away from their dominion, and time of life was given them for a time and a season.” Here, as in the seventh verse, we have shear. The reference then would be to the horns that still remained after the one blaspheming horn was destroyed. Theodotion agrees with the Massoretic. The Peshitta differs, but only slightly. As the Massoretic text stands, there is difficulty in maintaining that the reference here cannot be to any other than to the other three beasts. They should still occupy a place, but possess no dominion, even after they were removed from supreme authority. After Babylon lost imperial power, it still continued for a time a highly important province in the Persian Empire, and the sensibilities of the inhabitants were considered throughout the whole period of the Persian rule. After the Persian Empire was overturned by Alexander, there was still the province of Persis; and from the remains of the Persian Empire sprang up Parthia, and then the second Persian Empire; and after the rule of the caliphs had been broken, Persia revived as a Mohammedan power. When the Greek Empire fell, Greece still survived, not independent, but still influential. It is difficult to see what meaning this verse could have to one living at the time of the Maccabees, especially it’ he thought the Greek Empire was the fourth. Parthia certainly might represent Persia, but where was Media? “For a season and a time” does not refer to any definite time. Jephet-ibn-Ali regards the reference till the end of the rule of the fourth beast. This militates against the idea that ‛iddan must always mean “a year.”
This is a tricky thing to interpret, particularly if you argue that the world ends with the ending of the 4th best. Instead we seem to see a 4th empire fall, something else replace its dominion, but the other three beasts continue on as well.
If the 4th beast is Rome, you could argue that it was conquered by Christianity. If so, then “the Kingdom of Heaven” was established on earth, while other people in the world (Greeks, Persians, Babylonians) continue to exist.
A lot of the difficulty in the interpretation here is not knowing what the timeline of the other beasts means. Ellicott addresses that below:
(12) The rest of the beasts—i.e., the three first beasts which Daniel had seen coming out of the sea. He now learns what had befallen them. Their dominions had passed away, and their lives had been prolonged up to that definite point and time which had seemed fit to God, and no further. The period of life allotted to them by God was only a little while. (On “times” and “seasons,” see Note on Daniel 2:21.)
How long is “a little while” when God is deciding? That’s unclear. But it matters to anyone trying to fit world events into the prophetic narrative set out in Daniel.
It is often the case that prophecy is best understood only after it is fulfilled.
So what does this chapter mean for Jews? Christians view the text through the lens of Jesus Christ, but this is also a Jewish apocalyptic text and must surely have a meaning, for Jews, that does not include Christ. I found an excellent article from thetorah.com giving us some answers, included below: I definitely encourage a read through the article:
___________________________
Daniel’s Vision of the Four Beasts: The Prehistory of Chanukah
The four beasts of Daniel 7 represent four kingdoms. The terrifying fourth beast with ten horns and iron teeth is the Greek kingdom of Syria. This beast grows a talking horn, which represents Antiochus IV, whose persecutions (167–164 B.C.E.), the biblical author believes, can only be stopped by divine intercession.
The four beasts of Daniel 7 represent four kingdoms. The terrifying fourth beast with ten horns and iron teeth is the Greek kingdom of Syria. This beast grows a talking horn, which represents Antiochus IV, whose persecutions (167–164 B.C.E.), the biblical author believes, can only be stopped by divine intercession.
The story of Chanukah is generally viewed as post-biblical, attested in sources such as 1–2 Maccabees, Josephus, and rabbinic literature. But the earliest references to Antiochus and his decrees, the basis of Chanukah, are in fact found in what is probably the latest biblical book, Daniel. This book offers its own theological perspective on the events that transpired and the hope for their resolution.
The book of Daniel is comprised of two sections. The first (chapters 1–6) presents stories about the life of the protagonist in the courts of the foreign empires. The second (chapters 7–12) contains four apocalyptic visions received by Daniel, which describe in rather cryptic language and vivid imagery the past, present and future history of these foreign empires. The visions in these chapters are apocalyptic, reflecting on the relationship between these earthly kingdoms and their heavenly counterparts, and Israel’s place within these larger schemes.
The Vision of Chapter 7
Scholars agree that the numerous historical allusions in the apocalyptic visions refer to none other than Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the arch-villain of the Chanukah story.[1]
Antiochus IV Epiphanes first appears in the context of a complex Aramaic vision in Daniel 7.[2] This chapter presents a double apocalyptic vision,[3] and alternates between a prose description of four beasts, representing four kingdoms, and a poetic description of the heavenly court in which these beasts are judged and convicted. The differences between these two have led to the suggestion that they are in fact the work of two different authors that have been combined here.[4] However, it seems more likely that instead of two authors, we have in this case a subtle literary technique by which the author of Daniel 7 distinguished between the two scenes within the mythic realm.
The Four Beasts
The vision begins with the appearance of the four beasts:
דניאל ז:ב עָנֵה דָנִיֵּאל וְאָמַר חָזֵה הֲוֵית בְּחֶזְוִי עִם לֵילְיָא וַאֲרוּ אַרְבַּע רוּחֵי שְׁמַיָּא מְגִיחָן לְיַמָּא רַבָּא. ז:ג וְאַרְבַּע חֵיוָן רַבְרְבָן סָלְקָן מִן יַמָּא שָׁנְיָן דָּא מִן דָּא.
Dan 7:2 Daniel related the following: “In my vision at night, I saw the four winds of heaven stirring up the great sea. 7:3 Four mighty beasts different from each other emerged from the sea.
The first three beasts are mixed creatures, combinations of different animals that clearly distinguishes them from realistic, earthly ones:
1. Lion with Eagle’s wings
ז:ד קַדְמָיְתָא כְאַרְיֵה וְגַפִּין דִּי נְשַׁר לַהּ חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד דִּי מְּרִיטוּ גַפַּיהּ וּנְטִילַת מִן אַרְעָא וְעַל רַגְלַיִן כֶּאֱנָשׁ הֳקִימַת וּלְבַב אֱנָשׁ יְהִיב לַהּ.
7:4 The first was like a lion but had eagles’ wings. As I looked on, its wings were plucked off, and it was lifted off the ground and set on its feet like a man and given the mind of a man.
2. Three-fanged bear
ז:ה וַאֲרוּ חֵיוָה אָחֳרִי תִנְיָנָה דָּמְיָה לְדֹב וְלִשְׂטַר חַד הֳקִמַת וּתְלָת עִלְעִין בְּפֻמַּהּ בֵּין שניה [שִׁנַּהּ] וְכֵן אָמְרִין לַהּ קוּמִי אֲכֻלִי בְּשַׂר שַׂגִּיא.
7:5 Then I saw a second, different beast, which was like a bear but raised on one side, and with three fangs in its mouth among its teeth; it was told, ‘Arise, eat much meat!’
3. Four-winged leopard
ז:ו בָּאתַר דְּנָה חָזֵה הֲוֵית וַאֲרוּ אָחֳרִי כִּנְמַר וְלַהּ גַּפִּין אַרְבַּע דִּי עוֹף עַל גביה [גַּבַּהּ] וְאַרְבְּעָה רֵאשִׁין לְחֵיוְתָא וְשָׁלְטָן יְהִיב לַהּ.
7:6 After that, as I looked on, there was another one, like a leopard, and it had on its back four wings like those of a bird; the beast had four heads, and dominion was given to it.
Even within this mythic context, the fourth beast is described as fundamentally distinct:
4. A ten-horned beast with iron teeth
דניאל ז:ז בָּאתַר דְּנָה חָזֵה הֲוֵית בְּחֶזְוֵי לֵילְיָא וַאֲרוּ חֵיוָה רביעיה [רְבִיעָאָה] דְּחִילָה וְאֵימְתָנִי וְתַקִּיפָא יַתִּירָא וְשִׁנַּיִן דִּי פַרְזֶל לַהּ רַבְרְבָן אָכְלָה וּמַדֱּקָה וּשְׁאָרָא ברגליה [בְּרַגְלַהּ] רָפְסָה וְהִיא מְשַׁנְּיָה מִן כָּל חֵיוָתָא דִּי קָדָמַיהּ וְקַרְנַיִן עֲשַׂר לַהּ.
Dan 7:7 After that, as I looked on in the night vision, there was a fourth beast — fearsome, dreadful, and very powerful, with great iron teeth — that devoured and crushed, and stamped the remains with its feet. It was different from all the other beasts which had gone before it; and it had ten horns.
This powerful and terrifying creature is indeed “different from all the other beasts which had gone before it”; This creature has “iron teeth”[5] and is unlike any known animal. The beast is described as having ten horns but it morphs before Daniel’s eyes:
* The new little horn that speaks arrogantly
דניאל ז:ח מִשְׂתַּכַּל הֲוֵית בְּקַרְנַיָּא וַאֲלוּ קֶרֶן אָחֳרִי זְעֵירָה סִלְקָת ביניהון [בֵּינֵיהֵן] וּתְלָת מִן קַרְנַיָּא קַדְמָיָתָא אתעקרו [אֶתְעֲקַרָה] מִן קדמיה [קֳדָמַהּ] וַאֲלוּ עַיְנִין כְּעַיְנֵי אֲנָשָׁא בְּקַרְנָא דָא וּפֻם מְמַלִּל רַבְרְבָן.
Dan 7:8 While I was gazing upon these horns, a new little horn sprouted up among them; three of the older horns were uprooted to make room for it. There were eyes in this horn like those of a man, and a mouth that spoke arrogantly.
This new horn, which displaces three other horns, and has eyes and a mouth that speaks arrogantly, is a unique feature of this fourth beast; this further distinguishes it from the first three.
God and the Heavenly Court Appear
Daniel’s vision continues with the appearance of the heavenly court, including a poetic description of the “Ancient of Days” (עַתִּיק יוֹמִין, i.e., God)[6] on his throne, with his book, a heavenly register of the behavior of those on earth, open before him, surrounded by fire and thousands of angels (vv.9-10). Judgment of the final beast ensues:
דניאל ז:יא חָזֵה הֲוֵית בֵּאדַיִן מִן קָל מִלַּיָּא רַבְרְבָתָא דִּי קַרְנָא מְמַלֱּלָה חָזֵה הֲוֵית עַד דִּי קְטִילַת חֵיוְתָא וְהוּבַד גִּשְׁמַהּ וִיהִיבַת לִיקֵדַת אֶשָּׁא.
Dan 7:11 I was looking on and then, because of the arrogant words that the horn spoke, the beast was killed as I looked on; its body was destroyed and it was consigned to the flames.
A less harsh judgment on the first three beasts follows (v. 12), and the vision ends when sovereignty on earth is given to the “one like a man” (כבר אנש, v. 13), who receives an eternal kingdom (vv. 13-14).[7]
Symbolic Meaning of the Beasts
The vision is enigmatic and even Daniel cannot understand it and needs to enlist the interpretive assistance of an angelic intermediary:[8]
דניאל ז:טו אֶתְכְּרִיַּת רוּחִי אֲנָה דָנִיֵּאל בְּגוֹא נִדְנֶה וְחֶזְוֵי רֵאשִׁי יְבַהֲלֻנַּנִי. ז:טז קִרְבֵת עַל חַד מִן קָאֲמַיָּא וְיַצִּיבָא אֶבְעֵא מִנֵּהּ עַל כָּל דְּנָה וַאֲמַר לִי וּפְשַׁר מִלַּיָּא יְהוֹדְעִנַּנִי.
Dan 7:15 As for me, Daniel, my spirit was disturbed within me and the vision of my mind alarmed me. 7:16 I approached one of the attendants and asked him the true meaning of all this. He gave me this interpretation of the matter:
ז:יז אִלֵּין חֵיוָתָא רַבְרְבָתָא דִּי אִנִּין אַרְבַּע אַרְבְּעָה מַלְכִין יְקוּמוּן מִן אַרְעָא.ז:יח וִיקַבְּלוּן מַלְכוּתָא קַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין וְיַחְסְנוּן מַלְכוּתָא עַד עָלְמָא וְעַד עָלַם עָלְמַיָּא.
7:17 “These great beasts, four in number mean four kingdoms will arise out of the earth. 7:18 then holy ones of the Most High will receive the kingdom, and will possess the kingdom forever – forever and ever.”
The heavenly attendant explains the vision as outlining four earthly kingdoms, likely in sequential order. Scholars have identified the first three kingdoms as Babylonia, Media, and Persia respectively, with the fourth and final earthly kingdom as Greece (Dan 8:21; 10:20; 11:2).[9] This will be followed by an eternal kingdom under heavenly auspices.[10]
The Nature of the Fourth Beast
Daniel seems uninterested in the first three beasts but wishes to understand the fourth better, especially the talking horn that spoke arrogantly.[11] He sees the following:
דניאל ז:כא חָזֵה הֲוֵית וְקַרְנָא דִכֵּן עָבְדָה קְרָב עִם קַדִּישִׁין וְיָכְלָה לְהוֹן.
Dan 7:21 I looked on as that horn made war with the holy ones and overcame them. [12]
This horn is described as fighting with heaven and even winning, but it will ultimately be punished by a heavenly court, which will take away his dominion, and in its place a heavenly sanctioned, eternal kingdom will be established:
דניאל ז:כב עַד דִּי אֲתָה עַתִּיק יוֹמַיָּא וְדִינָא יְהִב לְקַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין וְזִמְנָא מְטָה וּמַלְכוּתָא הֶחֱסִנוּ קַדִּישִׁין.
Dan 7:22 Until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was rendered in favor of the holy ones of the Most High, for the time had come, and the holy ones took possession of the kingdom.
At this point, Daniel receives a detailed explanation of the fourth beast:
דניאל ז:כג כֵּן אֲמַר חֵיוְתָא רְבִיעָיְתָא מַלְכוּ רביעיא [רְבִיעָאָה] תֶּהֱוֵא בְאַרְעָא דִּי תִשְׁנֵא מִן כָּל מַלְכְוָתָא וְתֵאכֻל כָּל אַרְעָא וּתְדוּשִׁנַּהּ וְתַדְּקִנַּהּ. ז:כד וְקַרְנַיָּא עֲשַׂר מִנַּהּ מַלְכוּתָה עַשְׂרָה מַלְכִין יְקֻמוּן וְאָחֳרָן יְקוּם אַחֲרֵיהוֹן וְהוּא יִשְׁנֵא מִן קַדְמָיֵא וּתְלָתָה מַלְכִין יְהַשְׁפִּל.
Dan 7:23 This is what he said: ‘The fourth beast means – there will be a fourth kingdom upon the earth which will be different from all the kingdoms; it will devour the whole earth, tread it down, and crush it. 7:24And the ten horns mean – from that kingdom, ten kings will arise, and after them another will arise. He will be different from the former ones, and will bring low three kings.
The heavenly being’s explanation ends with a description of the judgment of the fourth beast and the establishment of the final, heavenly kingdom that will follow.[13]
Interpreting the Interpretation
As noted above, based on the internal considerations of the book of Daniel and extrabiblical sources, this final kingdom can be identified as Greece. Although the beginnings of this empire are not described in chapter 7, the beginnings of both chapters 8 and 11 (8:5,8; 11:3–4) refer to a great king who dies at the peak of his power and was succeeded by four kings (8:8; 11:4ff.).
In the context of the Hellenistic empire, these can be identified rather easily as Alexander the Great and the Diadochoi, his generals who succeeded him and divided up his empire into smaller kingdoms. The dynastyies of two of these generals, Seleucus Nicanor who founded the kingdom of Syria, and Ptolemy Lagus, who founded the kingdom of Egypt, were particularly relevant for the subsequent Hellenistic history of the land of Israel, which is located between Syria and Egypt. In fact, Daniel 11 goes on to describe the acts of the King(s) of North [= Seleucid king(s)] and the King(s) of the South [= Ptolemiac king(s)].[14]
The ten horns of the fourth beast thus refer to a series of kings in one of these kingdoms, culminating with the blaspheming sovereign represented by the new horn. Scholars agree that the kingdom in question is Syria, and the kings are from the Seleucud dynasty, culminating in Antiochus IV as the blaspheming monarch. It is not fully clear if the number ten here is precise (in which case it would include Alexander too), or whether it is a typological or schematic number.
Antiochus IV and the New Little Horn
The new little horn (קֶרֶן אָחֳרִי זְעֵירָה) that grows on the beast speaks arrogantly, and makes war on heaven is none other than Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The same arrogant king, Antiochus IV, is criticized and feared elsewhere throughout the Danielic apocalypses, which describe in detail his attack on Jerusalem, its Temple, and the religious life of the residents of Judea.
As suggested by John Collins, the final three kings uprooted by Antiochus IV were probably his brother Seleucus IV (ruled 187–175) and his two sons, Antiochus and Demetrius, who were both in line to inherit the throne before Antiochus IV Epiphanes.[15] Seleucus IV was mudered by Heliodorus, and Demetrius was in Rome at the time as a hostage, allowing Antiochus IV to ascend to the throne.
The Horn’s Blasphemies
The text goes on to describe further the outrageous behavior of the new little horn:
דניאל ז:כה וּמִלִּין לְצַד עליא [עִלָּאָה] יְמַלִּל וּלְקַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין יְבַלֵּא
Dan 7:25 He will speak words against the Most High, and will speak [16][יבלא] (against) the Most High Holy One(s)[17](קדישי עליונין).
The accusation of “speak(ing) words against the Most High” may refer to Antiochus’ usage of divine epithets (“God Manifest [= Epiphanes]”) on his coinage,[18] but more likely refers to his general challenge of God’s Temple and people, which was viewed as blasphemous:[19]
1 Macc 1:54 Now on the fifteenth day of Kislev, in the one hundred forty-fifth year, they erected a desolating sacrilege on the altar of burnt offering… 1:59 On the twenty-fifth day of the month they offered sacrifice on the altar that was on top of the altar of burnt offering.
2 Macc 6:4 For the temple was filled with debauchery and reveling by the Gentiles, who dallied with prostitutes and had intercourse with women within the sacred precincts, and besides brought in things for sacrifice that were unfit.6:5 The altar was covered with abominable offerings that were forbidden by the laws.
The defiling of the Jerusalem Temple and the establishment of “desolating sacrilige” (βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως) – the equivalent of the שקוצ(ים) משֹׁמם “the appalling abomination” in Daniel 9:27 (see also 8:13; 11:31; 12:11) – is one of the primary accusations against Antiochus IV. It was perceived as an assault on the divine realm.
The Horn’s Attack on Jewish Holidays
Finally, the text describes this king’s attempt to make changes, presumably in Jewish practices:
וְיִסְבַּר לְהַשְׁנָיָה זִמְנִין וְדָת וְיִתְיַהֲבוּן בִּידֵהּ….
He will think of changing times and laws, and they will be delivered into his power….[20]
This king’s desire to “change times and laws” is almost certainly a reference to Antiochus’ decrees against observing Shabbat and other cultic festivals (cf. 1Macc 1:45; 2 Macc 6:6):[21]
1 Macc 1:44 And the king sent letters by messengers to Jerusalem and the towns of Judah; he directed them to follow customs strange to the land, 1:45 to forbid burnt offerings and sacrifices and drink offerings in the sanctuary, to profane sabbaths and festivals, 1:46 to defile the sanctuary and the priests, 1:47 to build altars and sacred precincts and shrines for idols, to sacrifice swine and other unclean animals, 1:48 and to leave their sons uncircumcised. They were to make themselves abominable by everything unclean and profane, 1:49 so that they would forget the law and change all the ordinances.
2 Macc 6:6 People could neither keep the sabbath, nor observe the festivals of their ancestors, nor so much as confess themselves to be Jews.
Thus, the king represented by the small, new horn seems clearly to refer to Antiochus IV, and his abominable behavior is almost certainly a reference to the Antiochian persecutions which motivated the successful Hasmonean revolt commemorated by Chanukah.
The Pre-Chanukah Story
The apocalypses of Daniel thus contain the earliest version of the story of Chanukah, told in the form of an apocalyptic vision. More accurately, they contain descriptions of the Antiochian persecutions, but without the resolution. The vision in ch. 7 was, therefore, composed at the height of his religious decrees, sometime between 167–164 B.C.E.[22] At that time, salvation could be imagined only through direct divine intervention, and not through the human agency of the Hasmonean revolt that occurred only a few years later. Daniel 7–12 thus offers a different religious lens by which to understand the Chanukah story.
_______________________________
Even among Jews, there are other interpretations of Daniel 7, however, this seems to be a mainstream interpretation. Christians would push back, pointing out that it was founded by 1st century Jews who did not think the apocalyptic vision from the text was a past event – shown most notably by the fact Revelation mirrors Daniel so closely and purports to be prophetic. Jews in turn would argue that the Christians were wrong.
Ultimately, we shall have to wait and see.
