1 Kings 22:1 And they continued three years without war between Syria and Israel.

1 Kings 22:2 And it came to pass in the third year, that Jehoshaphat the king of Judah came down to the king of Israel.

Two wars with Syria had already taken place, and Israel was twice victorious. The antitypes of the two wars are World War I and World War II. Syria was the traditional enemy of Israel, that is, of the northern kingdom as well as the southern kingdom. Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah, “came down” to the king of Israel. The expression “came down” is unusual because the ten-tribe kingdom was north of Judah, the two-tribe kingdom. However, Jerusalem is quite high in elevation—perhaps 2,300 feet above sea level—and a person traveling to northern Israel went north on the backbone of a spine. Then, to get into the Valley of Jezreel, he had to descend onto the plain. The words were probably written from that standpoint—Jehoshaphat went north and then had to descend from the mountain to meet the king on a much lower level.

1 Kings 22:3 And the king of Israel said unto his servants, Know ye that Ramoth in Gilead is ours, and we be still, and take it not out of the hand of the king of Syria?

King Ahab of the northern kingdom said to his servants, “Ramoth in Gilead is ours, but we are not taking it from the king of Syria.” Located in northern Transjordan, Ramoth-gilead was on the east side of the Jordan River. Ramoth was the capital of Gilead, a large, fertile area.

1 Kings 22:4 And he said unto Jehoshaphat, Wilt thou go with me to battle to Ramothgilead? And Jehoshaphat said to the king of Israel, I am as thou art, my people as thy people, my horses as thy horses.

Ahab asked Jehoshaphat, the king of the two tribes, the southern kingdom, “Will you fight with me to recover Ramoth-gilead?” Jehoshaphat replied, “Yes. I, my people, and my horses are yours.” Thus the king of Judah agreed to join forces with the northern kingdom to fight a common enemy.

Why did Ahab feel that this territory belonged to Israel? At the end of the 40 years in the wilderness, when Moses brought the Israelites to Gilead before entering Israel proper, some of the people wanted to stay on that east side of the Jordan River (Numbers 32). Accordingly, an agreement was made with Reuben, Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh that the men of those tribes would go and fight to subdue and conquer the Promised Land, but their families (the women and children) would remain behind in Gilead. The inheritance of the 2 1/2 tribes was across the Jordan River in Gilead in a large segment of what is called Jordan today. Thus, from a historical standpoint, Ahab felt that this land in Gilead had been deeded to Israel by God. The problem was that now much of this territory was occupied by an alien power, the king of Syria. King Ahab felt that if the northern and southern kingdoms joined forces, the cooperative effort would ensure the recapturing of Ramoth-gilead.

In many pictures, the northern kingdom represents Catholicism because it consisted of ten tribes, whereas the southern kingdom represents Protestantism because it had only two tribes. But in this account, Jezebel, a woman, was not involved, so the participants were just two kings and their forces fighting against the king of Syria. In the past, we suggested that Catholicism is involved in the antitype because that religion boasts of numbers and considers itself a universal church with millions of communicants. However, from a natural standpoint, the ten tribes of Israel represent Europe. Just as Papacy was involved with the Holy Roman Empire, which was basically Europe, so here the more populous ten-tribe northern kingdom represents Europe, which consists of Catholic-dominated countries. The two-tribe southern kingdom represents the United States and England, which are Protestant-dominated countries. In other words, America and England will join forces with Europe in connection with World War III.

Comment: Jehoshaphat said, “My horses [are] as thy horses,” and horses are a symbol of doctrines.

Reply: Yes, an ecumenical spirit is indicated here, and Syria represents the power occupying this other area styled Ramoth-gilead.

This battle for Ramoth-gilead with Israel and Judah fighting Syria, the common enemy, is representative of the end of the Gospel Age, and the battle will be repeated in the next generation (2 Kings 9:1–10:30). At one time, the Holy Roman Empire occupied a much larger area than the Europe we have been accustomed to in recent years. Then, in the last year or so, East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, etc., defected because they were tired of the yoke of communism, but this secession was brought about without warfare. These countries, which historically were Catholic, are now throwing in their lot with the Western powers and trying to make an economic union. What we are seeing today is not the picture shown here in 1 Kings 22 because war was involved in the type. Therefore, although these countries have joined forces, other European nations are not yet in this financial arrangement. For example, Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania want their independence from Russia. They, too, are traditionally Catholic or Russian Orthodox. Hence some powers considered to be part of Christendom in the past are still under communist domination. [Note: This Bible study took place in 1990.]

The point is that in spite of current events, conditions can again change radically. What we see today is not indicative of the future. A backlash within these governments could make seemingly friendly countries very hostile. Whereas formerly Communist countries now look to America and would like to share the benefits and fruits of economic prosperity, some of them are finding they cannot easily switch to democracy. Their whole system, their economic infrastructure, is geared to a different type of thinking, so there is a disenchantment with some of the populace. As time goes on and conditions worsen and the hoped-for economic prosperity does not come, the people may reason, “We were better off under communism.” At any rate, the time will come when there is a union of the so-called Christian countries.

1 Kings 22:5 And Jehoshaphat said unto the king of Israel, Inquire, I pray thee, at the word of the LORD today.

1 Kings 22:6 Then the king of Israel gathered the prophets together, about four hundred men, and said unto them, Shall I go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall I forbear? And they said, Go up; for the Lord shall deliver it into the hand of the king.

1 Kings 22:7 And Jehoshaphat said, Is there not here a prophet of the LORD besides, that we might inquire of him?

Jehoshaphat wanted to have a religious backing for this proposed battle to recover Ramothgilead. Therefore, he wanted to inquire of the Lord to get this blessing. Those who prophesied were the 400 prophets of Jezebel, who were not slain when, following the contest, Elijah put to death the 450 prophets of Baal. Of course the 400 prophets were biased in favor of the northern kingdom of Israel. With unanimity, they declared, “Go and fight, for you will win this battle. You will have the Lord’s backing.” Realizing the bias, Jehoshaphat asked, “Is there not an additional prophet of Jehovah in the northern kingdom of whom we might inquire?” The 400 prophets were not enough.

1 Kings 22:8 And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man, Micaiah the son of Imlah, by whom we may inquire of the LORD: but I hate him; for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil. And Jehoshaphat said, Let not the king say so.

Ahab replied, “There is yet one man in the northern kingdom, Micaiah the prophet, but I do not like him because he prophesies evil about me.” (Based on prior prophecies, Micaiah’s testimonies were not in the best interests of the king of Israel.) Jehoshaphat then said, “Let not the king say so.” At Jehoshaphat’s request, Ahab summoned Micaiah.

This situation was unique—with 400 prophets all testifying the same way, the voice of just one more prophet would be considered. Obviously, the setting was providential. The implication is that Micaiah represents the Lord’s people, who, at the end of the age, will somehow be representatively asked their opinion about the coming battle.

Comment: Because of the unstable, urgent conditions at that time, the so-called Christian governments will consult with occult sources.

Reply: Yes, Jezebel’s 400 prophets were of this spirit, and the Scriptures indicate that the civil powers will inquire of wizards, astrologers, etc. “And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God?” (Isa. 8:19). In wanting to get as much support as possible for entering the confrontation, the governments will resort to occult methods.

1 Kings 22:9 Then the king of Israel called an officer, and said, Hasten hither Micaiah the son of Imlah.

1 Kings 22:10 And the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah sat each on his throne, having put on their robes, in a void place in the entrance of the gate of Samaria; and all the prophets prophesied before them.

The king of Israel humored Jehoshaphat by agreeing to summon Micaiah. While an officer went to find Micaiah, the two kings dressed in their regal robes and went and sat on separate thrones “in a void place” at the entrance of the gate of Samaria. While they awaited the arrival of Micaiah, the 400 prophesied before them.

It is significant that the “void place” is a “threshing floor” in the RSV and KJV margin. The thrones being set on a threshing floor suggests the threshing of wheat and the latter part of the harvest, that is, the very end of the age. After the wheat is threshed, the tares will be burned (Matt. 13:40; Rev. 14:14-19).

1 Kings 22:11 And Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah made him horns of iron: and he said, Thus saith the LORD, With these shalt thou push the Syrians, until thou have consumed them.

1 Kings 22:12 And all the prophets prophesied so, saying, Go up to Ramoth-gilead, and prosper: for the LORD shall deliver it into the king’s hand.

There was a consensus of the 400 prophets earlier, but now, as the kings of Israel and Judah sat at the entrance to the gate of Samaria, either all of the prophets or just the more prominent ones wanted to show not only that they agreed but also that they were being moved by the spirit, or influence, of a miraculous power. Of course it was an unholy spirit, and evidently, they were in a frenzy.

Of the 400 prophets, one named Zedekiah made horns of iron to demonstrate dramatically and forcibly that the war would be a success. His words were, “Thus saith the LORD, With these [horns] shalt thou push the Syrians, until thou have consumed them.” The two horns represented the two kings, the two powers.

All 400 prophets agreed that Ramoth-gilead would fall from Syrian control into the hands of Israel and Judah. In chorus fashion, they chanted, “Go up to battle at Ramoth-gilead and prosper, for God will give you the victory.” The 400 prophesied a false message in the name of Jehovah, for their direction was actually coming from Satan.

1 Kings 22:13 And the messenger that was gone to call Micaiah spake unto him, saying, Behold now, the words of the prophets declare good unto the king with one mouth: let thy word, I pray thee, be like the word of one of them, and speak that which is good.

1 Kings 22:14 And Micaiah said, As the LORD liveth, what the LORD saith unto me, that will I speak.

The messenger went to summon Micaiah, but before the prophet returned and had an audience with the kings and gave his advice, the messenger tried to persuade him to agree with the 400 prophets. The messenger said in effect, “All the others agree, and it is in your best interest to do the same and to speak that which is good.” The implication is that the feet members will be pressured to slant their testimony to agree with the church-state  confederacy.

But what does the Lord’s Word instruct? “Say ye not, A confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid. Sanctify the LORD of hosts himself; and let him be your fear, and let him be your dread” (Isa. 8:12,13). Micaiah faithfully replied, “What the LORD said unto me, that will I speak.” But his actual answer to the king of Israel was startling, as we shall see.

1 Kings 22:15 So he came to the king. And the king said unto him, Micaiah, shall we go against Ramoth-gilead to battle, or shall we forbear? And he answered him, Go, and prosper: for the LORD shall deliver it into the hand of the king.

1 Kings 22:16 And the king said unto him, How many times shall I adjure thee that thou tell me nothing but that which is true in the name of the LORD?

The king of Israel asked Micaiah, “Should we go to battle to take Ramoth-gilead?” He got right to the point and did not use any flowery language. “Yes or no—what is your answer?” was his attitude. Micaiah responded, “Go, and prosper: for the LORD shall deliver Ramoth-gilead into the hand of the king.” The prophet’s literal words seem to indicate that he agreed with the 400 false prophets, but the king’s reaction shows otherwise: “How many times shall I adjure you to tell me nothing but that which is true in the name of the LORD?” Ahab understood by the way Micaiah spoke that he did not mean what he was saying. Despite the words, Micaiah could have indicated his real advice in a number of ways. For example, he could have parroted, or mimicked, the testimony of the other prophets. Also, hand gestures and facial expressions could have added to the effectiveness of his reply. The point is that he used SARCASM to indicate that the planned attack on Ramoth-gilead forebode defeat. The king’s reply suggests that Micaiah had used this technique in the past, that it was characteristic of him. Clearly, the king of Israel got the message—Micaiah’s reply was “no” in a “yes” form; it was sarcasm.

1 Kings 22:17 And he said, I saw all Israel scattered upon the hills, as sheep that have not a shepherd: and the LORD said, These have no master: let them return every man to his house in peace.

1 Kings 22:18 And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, Did I not tell thee that he would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil?

Immediately Micaiah reported a vision or a dream: “I saw all Israel [the northern kingdom] scattered upon the hills, as sheep that do not have a shepherd.” Right away we can see the drift of the vision, for the king of Israel was the “shepherd,” and the “sheep” were his army. It is significant that the prophet singled out Israel, not Judah.

Micaiah continued, “And the LORD said, These [the sheep] have no master: let them return every man to his house in peace.” In other words, there would be a defeat.

The king of Israel then said to Jehoshaphat, the king of Judah, “Didn’t I tell you that Micaiah would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil?” Ahab realized that the prophecy forebode ill for him.

1 Kings 22:19 And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.

1 Kings 22:20 And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.

1 Kings 22:21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him.

1 Kings 22:22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.

1 Kings 22:23 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.

Verses 19-23 begin to tie this vision in with Revelation 16:13,14 about the three unclean froglike lying spirits of demons that will come out of the mouth of the beast, the dragon, and the false prophet to gather the nations to the battle of Armageddon. Thus the Micaiah picture pertains to the end of the age.

Micaiah used a hypothetical situation to foretell truth. (Similarly, Jesus used parables to teach true lessons.) Here God was in heaven seated on His throne with the host of heaven standing on both sides. He asked, “How can Ahab be persuaded to go to the battle at Ramoth-gilead and be defeated?” Of course God would not literally ask such a question, but hypothetical techniques were used on many occasions in the Old Testament, such as the allegory in the beginning of the Book of Job (Job 1:6-12). Here the technique was a form of sarcasm to show that Ahab and Jehoshaphat would not listen to the true advice. After several suggestions, a “spirit” came forth and said he would be “a lying spirit” in the mouth of all 400 false prophets; that is, he would influence their words. God said, “Go ahead, for you will be successful.”

Micaiah ended the prophetic vision bluntly and boldly: “The LORD has spoken evil concerning you, Ahab.”

1 Kings 22:24 But Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah went near, and smote Micaiah on the cheek, and said, Which way went the spirit of the LORD from me to speak unto thee?

Zedekiah, the son of Chenaanah, dramatically smote Micaiah on the cheek. In assuming the leadership of the 400 false prophets on this occasion, he spoke boldly: “Which way went the spirit of the LORD from me to speak unto you?” The 400 were all supposed to be true prophets of God, and here was this upstart, Micaiah, who prophesied the opposite result: defeat. This same Zedekiah had made two horns of iron earlier (verse 11).

Q: What or whom does Zedekiah represent in the antitype?

A: A spokesman for Christendom will take the lead in opposing the feet members. In effect, Micaiah had said that the 400 prophets were all liars. Zedekiah could even be the pope, but his actual identity remains to be seen. The scenes that will take place at the end of the age will be in different countries—the United States, Canada, the nations of Europe, etc.— and the Lord’s people are in all these places. Therefore, the representative will be somebody with respect to the locale that is involved. If the setting of the Micaiah picture is in Europe, the mouthpiece for the 400 prophets will also be there, and of course the pope, being in Italy, is in Europe. No doubt there will be another spokesman in this country. The point is that in Catholic countries, the beast will have the most to say; in Protestant countries, the false prophet will be the most vociferous; and in non-Christian countries such as those in Africa, the dragon will speak. In some countries, two or three of these elements will act together. Indeed the effect of the unclean doctrines that emanate from these three symbols will be worldwide in drawing the people, or nations, to the battle of Armageddon.

Another point to be noted is that by boldly hitting Micaiah on the cheek, Zedekiah broke the spell and, in effect, shut off the prophet’s influence. Then Zedekiah said, “Which way did the spirit of the LORD leave me to speak through your mouth?” In other words, he was saying, “God speaks through my mouth, not yours.” This psychological interference stilled Micaiah’s influence, and Ahab and even Jehoshaphat disregarded his testimony and went to battle against the king of Syria in Ramoth-gilead. On the whole, Jehoshaphat was considered a good king, but he was inveigled into this battle, maybe more from a political standpoint. Also, there was intermarriage between one of Jehoshaphat’s children and a son or daughter of Ahab, so a certain degree of rapport existed between them.

1 Kings 22:25 And Micaiah said, Behold, thou shalt see in that day, when thou shalt go into an inner chamber to hide thyself.

1 Kings 22:26 And the king of Israel said, Take Micaiah, and carry him back unto Amon the governor of the city, and to Joash the king’s son;

1 Kings 22:27 And say, Thus saith the king, Put this fellow in the prison, and feed him with bread of affliction and with water of affliction, until I come in peace.

1 Kings 22:28 And Micaiah said, If thou return at all in peace, the LORD hath not spoken by me. And he said, Hearken, O people, every one of you.

1 Kings 22:29 So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah went up to Ramothgilead.

Micaiah predicted defeat and said the day would come when Zedekiah would go into an inner chamber to hide himself. Ahab then ordered Micaiah to be imprisoned and fed with the bread and water “of affliction” until he returned victorious. We are reminded of John the Baptist’s bold testimony, which led to his imprisonment. However, he did not remain very long in prison, before he was beheaded at the machinations of Herodias after her daughter Salome’s dancing before Herod. The Micaiah picture does not conflict with the type of John the Baptist.

The account simply says that Micaiah went to prison, and we hear no more about him after he said to Ahab, “If you return in peace, God has not spoken by me.” In other words, if Ahab returned victoriously from the battle, Micaiah was a false prophet. Then Micaiah swiftly introduced an exhortation to the people: “Hearken, O people, every one of you.” He wanted the two kings to note what he had just said in warning the people.

“So the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah went up to Ramoth-gilead.” Ahab and Jehoshaphat ignored Micaiah’s advice and went to battle at Ramoth-gilead.

1 Kings 22:30 And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, I will disguise myself, and enter into the battle; but put thou on thy robes. And the king of Israel disguised himself, and went into the battle.

1 Kings 22:31 But the king of Syria commanded his thirty and two captains that had rule over his chariots, saying, Fight neither with small nor great, save only with the king of Israel.

1 Kings 22:32 And it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots saw Jehoshaphat, that they said, Surely it is the king of Israel. And they turned aside to fight against him: and Jehoshaphat cried out.

1 Kings 22:33 And it came to pass, when the captains of the chariots perceived that it was not the king of Israel, that they turned back from pursuing him.

Ahab disguised himself before entering the battle, but he told Jehoshaphat to wear his kingly raiment. We are reminded of the John the Baptist picture, in which Queen Herodias (Catholicism) put her daughter Salome (Protestantism) in the forefront (Matt. 14:3-11; Mark 6:17-28). When Salome danced and impressed King Herod (civil power), he rashly promised her, in front of his lords, whatever she wanted. Herodias stayed in the background and advised the daughter to ask immediately for the head (the life) of John the Baptist (the feet members) on a platter. To the observers, the daughter appeared to be wholly responsible for the request.

In the antitype, Salome will be one of the Protestant daughters of the Catholic mother. And there are other pictures, so depending on which part of the world one of the feet members lives in, a particular type might or might not pertain to that area. Generally speaking, people tend to think only from their own standpoint.

Since Micaiah had prophesied that the king of Israel would die, Ahab might have thought his disguise would enable him to survive; that is, he was trying to play it safe. Meanwhile, the king of Syria instructed his 32 captains to kill only the king of Israel. Therefore, when they saw Jehoshaphat in his regal robes and using a fancy chariot, they seized him, assuming he was King Ahab. When Jehoshaphat revealed his identity, the Syrians let him go.

1 Kings 22:34 And a certain man drew a bow at a venture, and smote the king of Israel between the joints of the harness: wherefore he said unto the driver of his chariot, Turn thine hand, and carry me out of the host; for I am wounded.

1 Kings 22:35 And the battle increased that day: and the king was stayed up in his chariot against the Syrians, and died at even: and the blood ran out of the wound into the midst of the chariot.

1 Kings 22:36 And there went a proclamation throughout the host about the going down of the sun, saying, Every man to his city, and every man to his own country.

Micaiah’s prediction came true. Ahab died, and the predicted proclamation went out, “Let every man return to his own house, city, and country in peace” (see 1 Kings 22:17). When Ahab was slain by “a certain man [who] drew a bow at a venture,” a pool of blood collected in the chariot.

Comment: For “at a venture,” the NIV has “at random.”

End-of-the-Age Antitype

Micaiah, who represents the Little Flock, was put in prison. A “certain man” shot an arrow of truth that smote Ahab, the king of Israel, and resulted in his eventual death. The suggestion is that an individual (or a class represented by the individual) will somehow broadcast a message that is very damaging to papal Europe.

The account in 2 Kings 9:1–10:28 regarding Jehu, who was at the battle in Ramoth-gilead, is a more complete picture. He was responsible for the death of Jezebel, and it might be said that he is the individual who shot the arrow. Elisha sent one of the sons of the prophets to tell Jehu that the God of Israel had determined he would be the successor of King Jehoram of Israel. In other words, the messenger precipitated the circumstances, and Jehu mortally wounded Jehoram. Thus there is a similarity in that both kings of Israel were slain: Ahab and Jehoram.

However, there are also a few significant differences in the accounts of Micaiah and Jehu. One difference is that in 1 Kings 22, Jehoshaphat returned from the battle at Ramoth-gilead, but the king of Israel died. The suggestion seems to be that Papacy will fall first. Since the beast represents Europe, the image of the beast would be the United States and possibly England. Hence the fall of the Protestant portion of Christendom will occur slightly later. Jehoshaphat, who represents Protestantism, was a good king overall, as was his father Asa, but peculiarly, from the time that Jehoshaphat returned to Judah, he seemed to go astray. Earlier he had removed the sodomites from the land and destroyed many images to false gods, but toward the end of his life, he turned back from closely hewing to the Lord.

Europe is basically Catholic. Generally speaking, the countries of Portugal, Spain, Italy, Germany, France, etc., are Catholic-oriented. Israel, the more populous ten-tribe kingdom, is a representation of Europe.

1 Kings 22:37 So the king died, and was brought to Samaria; and they buried the king in Samaria.

Ahab died in the battle and was brought back to the homeland, to Samaria, the capital of northern Israel. He was buried in that area.

1 Kings 22:38 And one washed the chariot in the pool of Samaria; and the dogs licked up his blood; and they washed his armour; according unto the word of the LORD which he spake.

Comment: Dogs licked up Ahab’s blood, as prophesied in 1 Kings 21:19. “And thou shalt speak unto him [Ahab], saying, Thus saith the LORD, Hast thou killed, and also taken possession?…In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine.”

Reply: This prophecy was given because of Ahab’s treatment of Naboth. Dogs licked up Ahab’s blood in Jezreel, the very place where Naboth had been slain and near where Jezebel would later be slain. Dogs also licked up Jezebel’s blood. Thus all three died in Jezreel: innocent Naboth and guilty Ahab and Jezebel. Elijah also prophesied the death of Ahab’s posterity: “Him that dieth of Ahab in the city the dogs shall eat; and him that dieth in the field shall the fowls of the air eat” (1 Kings 21:24).

1 Kings 22:39 Now the rest of the acts of Ahab, and all that he did, and the ivory house which he made, and all the cities that he built, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?

Ahab had a house that was garnished on the exterior with very expensive ivory. In addition, he built many cities.

1 Kings 22:40 So Ahab slept with his fathers; and Ahaziah his son reigned in his stead.

Ahab died, and his son Ahaziah reigned. There were two Ahaziahs and two Jehorams with some overlapping of their reigns.

1 Kings 22:41 And Jehoshaphat the son of Asa began to reign over Judah in the fourth year of Ahab king of Israel.

1 Kings 22:42 Jehoshaphat was thirty and five years old when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and five years in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Azubah the daughter of Shilhi.

After King Asa died, his son Jehoshaphat began to reign in Judah at age 35. He reigned for 25 years, or until he was 60 years old.

1 Kings 22:43 And he walked in all the ways of Asa his father; he turned not aside from it, doing that which was right in the eyes of the LORD: nevertheless the high places were not taken away; for the people offered and burnt incense yet in the high places.

1 Kings 22:44 And Jehoshaphat made peace with the king of Israel.

Jehoshaphat “walked in all the [good] ways of Asa his father.” However, Jehoshaphat did not take away all the high places, and it was not right that he “made peace” with King Ahab. What started the peace was the intermarriage of their children, which caused the duplication of some names.

1 Kings 22:45 Now the rest of the acts of Jehoshaphat, and his might that he showed, and how he warred, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?

In other words, the Book of Chronicles is written in the records of the kings of Judah, and the Book of Kings is written in the records of the kings of Israel. In many places, the writings are word for word, being a reiteration of what is recorded in the other book, although there are differences. Thus some events are recorded in both books.

1 Kings 22:46 And the remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land.

Jehoshaphat removed the rest of the sodomites from the land. Asa had tried to accomplish this cleansing but could not rid the land of all of them.

1 Kings 22:47 There was then no king in Edom: a deputy was king.

A deputy was the king in Edom.

1 Kings 22:48 Jehoshaphat made ships of Tharshish to go to Ophir for gold: but they went not; for the ships were broken at Ezion-geber.

2 Chronicles 20:35-37 reads, “And after this did Jehoshaphat king of Judah join himself with Ahaziah king of Israel, who did very wickedly: And he joined himself with him to make ships to go to Tarshish: and they made the ships in Ezion-geber. Then Eliezer the son of Dodavah of Mareshah prophesied against Jehoshaphat, saying, Because thou hast joined thyself with Ahaziah, the LORD hath broken thy works. And the ships were broken, that they were not able to go to Tarshish.” Because Jehoshaphat cooperated with the wicked King Ahaziah of Israel to make ships, God allowed the ships to be “broken” (shipwrecked) at Ezion-geber.

Divine Providence intervened because fraternization was a bad influence. The history of Israel during those days was quite corrupt, while Judah hewed to the line of righteousness, relatively speaking. The working agreement was an example of evil communications corrupting good conduct. Thus the joint venture was frustrated when the ships were destroyed.

1 Kings 22:49 Then said Ahaziah the son of Ahab unto Jehoshaphat, Let my servants go with thy servants in the ships. But Jehoshaphat would not.

Jehoshaphat realized the shipwrecked vessels were a lesson from the Lord. Hence he refused further cooperation with King Ahaziah.

1 Kings 22:50 And Jehoshaphat slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David his father: and Jehoram his son reigned in his stead.

Jehoshaphat died, and his son Jehoram reigned in Judah.

1 Kings 22:51 Ahaziah the son of Ahab began to reign over Israel in Samaria the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and reigned two years over Israel.

1 Kings 22:52 And he did evil in the sight of the LORD, and walked in the way of his father, and in the way of his mother, and in the way of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin:

1 Kings 22:53 For he served Baal, and worshipped him, and provoked to anger the LORD God of Israel, according to all that his father had done.

Ahaziah had a short reign of only two years, and he did evil and served Baal like his father Ahab, his mother Jezebel, and Jeroboam, who not only caused the division of the nation of Israel into two kingdoms after Solomon’s death but also was the first king of the ten tribes.

(1989-1991 Study)

1 Kings 21:1 And it came to pass after these things, that Naboth the Jezreelite had a vineyard, which was in Jezreel, hard by the palace of Ahab king of Samaria.

1 Kings 21:2 And Ahab spake unto Naboth, saying, Give me thy vineyard, that I may have it for a garden of herbs, because it is near unto my house: and I will give thee for it a better vineyard than it; or, if it seem good to thee, I will give thee the worth of it in money.

1 Kings 21:3 And Naboth said to Ahab, The LORD forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee.

1 Kings 21:4 And Ahab came into his house heavy and displeased because of the word which Naboth the Jezreelite had spoken to him: for he had said, I will not give thee the inheritance of my fathers. And he laid him down upon his bed, and turned away his face, and would eat no bread.

Ahab pouted like a child because Naboth refused to give him the vineyard.

Comment: Again Ahab was “heavy and displeased” or “vexed and sullen,” as stated in the RSV, but this time his reaction was for selfish reasons (compare 1 Kings 20:43).

Here we have a completely different situation, a separate episode, with Ahab (representing civil power), Jezebel (picturing Catholicism), Naboth’s vineyard, and eventually the appearance of Elijah, who prophesied after Naboth’s death.

What does Naboth’s vineyard represent? We are inclined to think it was the Lord’s vineyard before Constantine’s day because Naboth was betrayed and Jezebel was involved in the acquisition of his vineyard and death (verse 15). Naboth himself represents the Lord’s true people, who had custody of the vineyard. We are reminded of the vineyard in Song 1:6.

Naboth was betrayed and slain as an individual. The Elijah picture commences in A.D. 539, the beginning of the 1,260 years, whereas the Naboth class existed earlier. Constantine called together various religious groups and took advice from pagan priests. The result was that Arius and his followers were considered heretics and lost their role as representatives of the Christian religion. Those who professed to be Christians after Constantine’s day were really the nominal Church, and true Christians became a distinct minority as time went on. They were persecuted and during the Dark Ages had to flee for their lives. In the beginning at our Lord’s First Advent, Christians were bona fide, and they more or less hewed to the line in the first (or Ephesus) stage of the Church. But little by little, the nominal (or man of sin) element developed in the Church and took over. In the eyes of the nations, those who were considered Christians held positions of prestige; they were recognized by the emperors and had large cathedrals. During that same period, true Christians had to flee, and they met in homes as little nobodies.

The Church started out as a woman clothed with the sun, but then a man-child was born who grew up to be the man of sin and was representative of the nominal Church. Thus the Lord’s vineyard was taken over, and the wheat field became a tare field. Stated another way, the vineyard went from Naboth to Ahab. Jezebel was very influential in causing this change.

Q: Certain elements of the Naboth type seem to be common with the experience of the feet members at the end of the age—the feast, the false witnesses, the accusation of blasphemer and traitor, and Naboth’s being put to death. Could Naboth also have an end-of-age fulfillment?  When the feet members are put to death, Jezebel will think she has taken over the vineyard.

A: Although the beast, dragon, and false prophet will be involved at the end of the age, we still believe Naboth is a picture of the earlier Church. We think a review is being given of the entire Gospel Age leading up to the time of the end because Papacy has already taken over the vineyard. What do we have today that would interest the nominal Church other than our being off the scene and not being a thorn in the flesh? The death of the antitypical Jezebel and Ahab will take place at the end of the age, but we think the sequence here is a different picture.

Ahab coveted the vineyard of Naboth, and Constantine coveted the Christian religion, for he thought it would be a unifying power to his empire. Thus Constantine adopted Christianity as the official religion of the empire. He got the vineyard, as it were.

1 Kings 21:5 But Jezebel his wife came to him, and said unto him, Why is thy spirit so sad, that thou eatest no bread?

1 Kings 21:6 And he said unto her, Because I spake unto Naboth the Jezreelite, and said unto him, Give me thy vineyard for money; or else, if it please thee, I will give thee another vineyard for it: and he answered, I will not give thee my vineyard.

1 Kings 21:7 And Jezebel his wife said unto him, Dost thou now govern the kingdom of Israel? arise, and eat bread, and let thine heart be merry: I will give thee the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite.

1 Kings 21:8 So she wrote letters in Ahab’s name, and sealed them with his seal, and sent the letters unto the elders and to the nobles that were in his city, dwelling with Naboth.

1 Kings 21:9 And she wrote in the letters, saying, Proclaim a fast, and set Naboth on high among the people:

1 Kings 21:10 And set two men, sons of Belial, before him, to bear witness against him, saying, Thou didst blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone him, that he may die.

1 Kings 21:11 And the men of his city, even the elders and the nobles who were the inhabitants in his city, did as Jezebel had sent unto them, and as it was written in the letters which she had sent unto them.

1 Kings 21:12 They proclaimed a fast, and set Naboth on high among the people.

1 Kings 21:13 And there came in two men, children of Belial, and sat before him: and the men of Belial witnessed against him, even against Naboth, in the presence of the people, saying, Naboth did blaspheme God and the king. Then they carried him forth out of the city, and stoned him with stones, that he died.

1 Kings 21:14 Then they sent to Jezebel, saying, Naboth is stoned, and is dead.

1 Kings 21:15 And it came to pass, when Jezebel heard that Naboth was stoned, and was dead, that Jezebel said to Ahab, Arise, take possession of the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, which he refused to give thee for money: for Naboth is not alive, but dead.

1 Kings 21:16 And it came to pass, when Ahab heard that Naboth was dead, that Ahab rose up to go down to the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, to take possession of it.

1 Kings 21:17 And the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying,

1 Kings 21:18 Arise, go down to meet Ahab king of Israel, which is in Samaria: behold, he is in the vineyard of Naboth, whither he is gone down to possess it.

1 Kings 21:19 And thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus saith the LORD, Hast thou killed, and also taken possession? And thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus saith the LORD, In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine.

1 Kings 21:20 And Ahab said to Elijah, Hast thou found me, O mine enemy? And he answered, I have found thee: because thou hast sold thyself to work evil in the sight of the LORD.

1 Kings 21:21 Behold, I will bring evil upon thee, and will take away thy posterity, and will cut off from Ahab him that pisseth against the wall, and him that is shut up and left in Israel,

1 Kings 21:22 And will make thine house like the house of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, and like the house of Baasha the son of Ahijah, for the provocation wherewith thou hast provoked me to anger, and made Israel to sin.

1 Kings 21:23 And of Jezebel also spake the LORD, saying, The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel.

1 Kings 21:24 Him that dieth of Ahab in the city the dogs shall eat; and him that dieth in the field shall the fowls of the air eat.

1 Kings 21:25 But there was none like unto Ahab, which did sell himself to work wickedness in the sight of the LORD, whom Jezebel his wife stirred up.

1 Kings 21:26 And he did very abominably in following idols, according to all things as did the Amorites, whom the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.

1 Kings 21:27 And it came to pass, when Ahab heard those words, that he rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his flesh, and fasted, and lay in sackcloth, and went softly.

1 Kings 21:28 And the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying,

1 Kings 21:29 Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? because he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the evil in his days: but in his son’s days will I bring the evil upon his house.

Elijah was to give a message to Ahab, condemning the seizing of Naboth’s vineyard and telling the king his destiny. “Thus saith the LORD, In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine.” In regard to his posterity, it was prophesied, “Him that dieth of Ahab in the city the dogs shall eat; and him that dieth in the field shall the fowls of the air eat.” And of Jezebel, it was said, “The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel.” From a historical standpoint, these prophecies led up to a future judgment to show the guilt of Ahab and Jezebel personally and a pending judgment upon what they represent. When Jezebel was slain by Jehu, he said, “This is the word of the LORD, which he spake by his servant Elijah the Tishbite, saying, In the portion of Jezreel shall dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel: And the carcase of Jezebel shall be as dung upon the face of the field in the portion of Jezreel; so that they shall not say, This is Jezebel” (2 Kings 9:36,37). The destiny of Jezebel, as pronounced by Elijah earlier, was then fulfilled.

The point is that chapter 21 gives a history of the relationship of church and state as it existed from Constantine on, leading up to present circumstances, which will be covered by Micaiah the prophet in chapter 22. The Micaiah prophecy tells of a future coming battle, namely, World War III. Chapter 21 is not as difficult to understand as the preceding chapter. If chapter 20 is meant to be understood as a type, we trust the Lord will provide the understanding in due time. Thus chapter 21 reviews the guilt that has been building up and the responsibility of Ahab and Jezebel. Indeed the civil and religious powers have been wanting down through the Gospel Age.

Q: What is the time setting for verse 29? When did Ahab humble himself?

A: Ahab represents the civil powers. In the Holy Roman Empire, both the dragon and the beast ruled with a high hand. That arrangement ceased, but it will briefly reoccur, for Europe wants to be united as in its former days of glory. Today the persecutions of the past are forgotten, but there was a period of time after the French Revolution when many nations were aghast at what had been done in the name of God and country with man’s inhumanity to man. And so a desire for democracy has been fostered in Europe and westward. Thus, although there was a time when the civil powers were ashamed of what had happened, they have now chosen to be mum about the subject and do not want a review of history. As a result, the populace as a whole is quite ignorant of what took place in the past.

The dragon (civil power) will not die until the end of the Gospel Age. The dragon pursued the woman (the true Church) into the wilderness, but since it was not successful in eliminating her entirely, it made preparations to attack “the remnant of her seed”(Rev. 12:14-17). The dragon cast water out of its mouth with the intention of overwhelming and drowning her, but instead the earth drank up the water. The dragon was frustrated, and the woman survived. There was shame back there over what had been done, for the dreadful type of persecution was exposed.

No wonder people do not want to hear about the persecution and the history of the misdeeds, especially those of the Roman Catholic Church! Similarly, Germany would like to hide what its people did to the Jews in the Holocaust.

Q: Does Elijah represent the feet members in exposing Papacy’s sins?

A: That could be. The feet members will pick up what others have said to a certain extent. Many Christians in past ages—the Elijah class—foresaw the doom of mystic Babylon and the powers that be, as well as their replacement with Messiah’s Kingdom. Should we get in a position of convenience and providence, we would do what Micaiah did; that is, we would have to speak out against the church-state union and say it is doomed. We will not want to join or have anything to do with the ecumenical movement because God’s Word condemns it. Thus the voice of the Elijah class has not been stilled but carries on, and as we get nearer the end of the age, some other things are beginning to be seen much more distinctly.

Q: We have tried to keep the Elijah type sequential, and the last date thus far is 1914-1918, when he was given a preview of coming events while in the cave. In 2 Kings 2, the account again picks up Elijah at the 1918 date at Gilgal. Therefore, wouldn’t Elijah here in 1 Kings 21 have to fit the 1914-1918 time slot too, lest this portion get out of sequence? If so, this would be a message in Pastor Russell’s day rather than in our day at the end of the Harvest.

A: We are still inclined to think, as expressed earlier, that Naboth represents Christians who suffered and died much earlier in the Gospel Age. The bloodguilt that was acquired by the civil and religious powers of the past yet needs to be requited.

Some Bible students of the past, under very hard circumstances and without having access to libraries, had a good understanding regarding the destiny of the nations and Papacy. Of course that knowledge is clearer today, for the light gets brighter and brighter. Generally speaking, the Elijah class has existed throughout the Gospel Age and has understood about Papacy for some time, for “Elias truly shall first come” (Matt. 17:11). Events at the end of Elijah’s life represent the feet members. The account in this twenty-first chapter is just an insertion: “And the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying, Arise, go down to meet Ahab king of Israel, which is in Samaria: behold, he is in the vineyard of Naboth, whither he is gone down to possess it,” etc.

(1989-1991 Study)

Says Sanctity Is About Virtue, Not Historical Impact

VATICAN CITY, DEC. 23, 2009 (Zenit.org).- A Vatican spokesman today said that Pope Pius XII has been declared “venerable” because he is a model for Christian life, not because of the historical decisions he made.

Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, offered a statement to Vatican Radio today in response to Benedict XVI’s declaration Saturday recognizing the heroic virtue of Pius XII.

The decree brings the World War II Pontiff one step closer to canonization and gives him the title “venerable.”

Father Lombardi acknowledged that the declaration “has elicited a certain number of reactions in the Jewish world” and offered a clarification of what the decree means.

Though many historians (including Jewish scholars) recognize Pius XII’s endeavors that resulted in saving thousands of Jews from the Nazi death camps, there are still those who contend that he did too little.

Father Lombardi explained that the recognition of heroic virtue “takes account of the circumstances in which the person lived, and hence it is necessary to examine the question from a historical standpoint, but the evaluation essentially concerns the witness of Christian life that the person showed — his intense relationship with God and continuous search for evangelical perfection [...] — and not the historical impact of all his operative decisions.”

Further historical study of Pius XII’s defense of the Jews is therefore still open, the spokesman affirmed. And in this regard, he repeated that documents regarding the 1939-1958 pontificate will be made available to scholars once they’ve been organized and classified, a project that, because of the “enormous mass” of documentation, “still requires a number of years’ work.”

No twin canonizations

Father Lombardi also responded to certain rumors that the simultaneous declaration of both Pius XII and Pope John Paul II as venerable could mean that any future canonization of the two Pontiffs would also coincide.

The spokesman affirmed that the two causes have not been “paired.”

“They are completely independent of one another and each will follow its own course,” he said. “There is, then, no reason to imagine that any future beatification will take place simultaneously.”

Friend of the Jews

Finally, Father Lombardi reiterated Benedict XVI’s great respect for the Jewish people.

“It is, then, clear that the recent signing of the decree [regarding Pius XII] is in no way to be read as a hostile act toward the Jewish people, and it is to be hoped that it will not be considered as an obstacle on the path of dialogue between Judaism and the Catholic Church,” he said. “Rather we trust that the Pope’s forthcoming visit to the Synagogue of Rome will be an opportunity for the cordial reiteration and reinforcement of ties of friendship and respect.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kevin’s Myspace

Pope Pius XII and Hitler

In 1933, under the leadership of its Cardinal Secretary of State, Eugenio Pacelli (who became Pope Pius XII), the Vatican negotiated a Concordat with Aldolf Hitler. Hitler portrayed his Third Reich as a Roman Catholic enterprise as a part of the loosely formed Holy Roman Empire. “Even an indirect endorsement from the Pope meant everything to Hitler as he sought to establish his legitimacy at home and abroad. In these early months of 1933, Catholic leaders went from being Hitler’s staunch opponents to his latest allies. This transformation was dramatically symbolized by the fact that in 1932, the Fulda Episcopal Conference, representing the Catholic hierarchy of Germany, banned membership in the Nazi Party and forbade priests from offering communion to anyone wearing the swastika. Then, on March 28, 1933, two weeks after Pacelli offered his overture to Hitler, the same Fulda conferees voted to lift the ban on Catholic membership in the Nazi Party.

Hitler established a context that would be ‘especially significant in the urgent struggle against international Jewry.’ to his cabinet on July 14th. The deep well of Catholic Antisemitism would be tapped to run as freely as any stream of hate in Germany. The positive side of the long-standing ambivalence, which had again and again been the source of impulses to protect Jews, would now be eliminated, allowing the negative side to metastasize.”

“The long-standing ambivalence” of the Catholic Church as an organization that had been, prior to the Reichskonkordat, “again and again… the source of impulses to protect Jews.” Would no longer be there. Make sure they suffer) so that Christians will see what happens to the Jews because they rejected the doctrine that Jesus was divine.

On March 2, 1939: Cardinal Eugenio Pacelli was sworn in as Pope Pius XII; four days later (as Hitler’s tanks are rolling into Poland).

Pope Pius XII

Pacelli wrote a letter to Hitler: “To the illustrious Herr Aldolf Hitler, Fuhrer and chancellor of the German Reich! Here at the beginning of our pontificate we wish to assure you that we remain devoted to the spiritual welfare of the German people entrusted to your leadership. During the many years we spent in Germany, we did all in our power to establish harmonious relations between church and state. Now that the responsibilities of our pastoral function have increased our opportunities, how much more ardently do we pray to reach that goal? May the prosperity of the German people and their progress in every domain come, with Gods help, to fruition!”

The Pope maintained a papal nuncio (Ambassador Archbishop Orsenigo) in Berlin throughout the War. At the Popes express wish (on the 20 of April 1939) Orsenigo opened a gala reception for Hitler’s 50th birthday, which became a tradition throughout the Third Reich, along with Cardinal Bertram sending “warmest congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the Bishops and dioceses in Germany”, to which he added “fervent prayers which the Catholics of Germany are sending to heaven on their alters”: “Hitlers Pope: The Secret History of Pius VII”, by, John Cornwell (all research for this book was done in the Vatican Library).

What is God referring to when He says Get out of her my people?

Revelation 18:2-10
2  And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
3  For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
4  And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5  For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
6  Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.
7  How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.
8  Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.
9  And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,
10  Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.

To answer this question would normally require a very lengthy response, we till try and sum things up and if the need arises to go into detail on how we arrive at some of our conclusions.

The entire book of Revelation has to do with experiences of the True Church of God (that is those individuals that compose the Bride of Christ, regardless of any sectarian divisions)

That being said, Babylon the great, is a sectarian division, i.e. the Papacy and the Roman Catholic Church. It was once a “golden cup” in the hand of the Lord (Jer. 51:7; Rev. 17:4), The True Church was taken over by the Nicolatian spirit (Lording over God’s Heritage–development of the Clergy and Laity classes). But until the Reformation they were the only source of God’s Word. Not that they used it, because they had become “babylon” i.e. confusion. They allowed traditions of man equal weight with God’s Word (you can see that in an article on the Vatican Nativity scene here, though it is an older article it does show that they prefered to harmonize tradition rather and God’s Word).

So besides confusion of doctrines by traditions (like the Scribes and Pharisees), they are the habitation of evil. We can clearly see that through the Inquisition where representatives of the Pope brutalized, persecuted and tortured  and destroyed anyone who dared to think differently (Protestants). We see how the Catholic church worked with Hitler, protects Pedophile priests, and pays millions in bribes to keep her dirty secrets. She has fornicated with all the kings of the earth –There is no separation of Church and State, Papacy is the Civil power that the Catholic church wields, and especially during the dark ages the Pope controlled the kings of the earth. No king (until Napoleon) was recognized unless the Pope crowned him. But in chapter 13 we see there was a wounding of one of the heads (see  the Newsletter on Revelation 13). Since 1929 we see the power coming back to the Papacy and see the Papacy again getting its tendrils into this worlds governments.

Another description is the wealth. That is abundantly known, so no reason to get into that. But will bring up one interesting historical note. During the days of the Black Plague (just before John Wycliffe came on the scene), the Pope declared a pilgrimage. A pilgrimage meant all pious Catholics had to go to the Pope (who at this time was in France) and bring him presents. This Pope didn’t care that all of Europe was dying because of the Black Plague, he just wanted presents. There is also the selling of indulgences (your get out of Purgatory free card), lighting of candles, scapulars, prayers for the dead, masses and rosaries–all of which cost your money, and none of which has any foundation in God’s Word.

This is the institution that God says to GET OUT of, because she will be destroyed and if you are supporting her, you will receive of her plagues. She is also pictured with Lot. Lot was removed just before they were destroyed, and if we as Christians want life, we need to GET OUT of systems he has condemned.

That being said, Revelation also speaks of Babylon as the “Mother of Harlots.” Who are the children of the Catholic Church? Protestants!

Protestants have ceased to Protest, because they also have become like their mother, a harlot and entangled with the World, and they too will go down. So if your fellowship is not protesting against the Papacy, you also need to get out of them as well.

It is every man for himself. No denomination will get you into God’s favor. You have to work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, and study to show yourselves approved, a workman that needeth not be ashamed. Wake up!, trim your Lamps and take the extra oil and go out and meet your Lord!

Also see a discussion on this topic in our New Forum we just set up and feel free to join and post as well!

 1 Kings 21:1 And it came to pass after these things, that Naboth the Jezreelite had a vineyard, which was in Jezreel, hard by the palace of Ahab king of Samaria.

1 Kings 21:2 And Ahab spake unto Naboth, saying, Give me thy vineyard, that I may have it for a garden of herbs, because it is near unto my house: and I will give thee for it a better vineyard than it; or, if it seem good to thee, I will give thee the worth of it in money.

1 Kings 21:3 And Naboth said to Ahab, The LORD forbid it me, that I should give the inheritance of my fathers unto thee.

1 Kings 21:4 And Ahab came into his house heavy and displeased because of the word which Naboth the Jezreelite had spoken to him: for he had said, I will not give thee the inheritance of my fathers. And he laid him down upon his bed, and turned away his face, and would eat no bread.

Ahab pouted like a child because Naboth refused to give him the vineyard.

Comment: Again Ahab was “heavy and displeased” or “vexed and sullen,” as stated in the RSV, but this time his reaction was for selfish reasons (compare 1 Kings 20:43).

Here we have a completely different situation, a separate episode, with Ahab (representing civil power), Jezebel (picturing Catholicism), Naboth’s vineyard, and eventually the appearance of Elijah, who prophesied after Naboth’s death.

What does Naboth’s vineyard represent? We are inclined to think it was the Lord’s vineyard before Constantine’s day because Naboth was betrayed and Jezebel was involved in the acquisition of his vineyard and death (verse 15). Naboth himself represents the Lord’s true people, who had custody of the vineyard. We are reminded of the vineyard in Song 1:6. Naboth was betrayed and slain as an individual. The Elijah picture commences in A.D. 539, the beginning of the 1,260 years, whereas the Naboth class existed earlier. Constantine called together various religious groups and took advice from pagan priests. The result was that Arius and his followers were considered heretics and lost their role as representatives of the Christian religion. Those who professed to be Christians after Constantine’s day were really the nominal Church, and true Christians became a distinct minority as time went on. They were persecuted and during the Dark Ages had to flee for their lives. In the beginning at our Lord’s First Advent, Christians were bona fide, and they more or less hewed to the line in the first (or Ephesus) stage of the Church. But little by little, the nominal (or man of sin) element developed in the Church and took over. In the eyes of the nations, those who were considered Christians held positions of prestige; they were recognized by the emperors and had large cathedrals. During that same period, true Christians had to flee, and they met in homes as little nobodies.

The Church started out as a woman clothed with the sun, but then a man-child was born who grew up to be the man of sin and was representative of the nominal Church. Thus the Lord’s vineyard was taken over, and the wheat field became a tare field. Stated another way, the vineyard went from Naboth to Ahab. Jezebel was very influential in causing this change.

Q: Certain elements of the Naboth type seem to be common with the experience of the feet members at the end of the age—the feast, the false witnesses, the accusation of blasphemer and traitor, and Naboth’s being put to death. Could Naboth also have an end-of-age fulfillment?

When the feet members are put to death, Jezebel will think she has taken over the vineyard.

A: Although the beast, dragon, and false prophet will be involved at the end of the age, we still believe Naboth is a picture of the earlier Church. We think a review is being given of the entire Gospel Age leading up to the time of the end because Papacy has already taken over the vineyard. What do we have today that would interest the nominal Church other than our being off the scene and not being a thorn in the flesh? The death of the antitypical Jezebel and Ahab will take place at the end of the age, but we think the sequence here is a different picture. Ahab coveted the vineyard of Naboth, and Constantine coveted the Christian religion, for he thought it would be a unifying power to his empire. Thus Constantine adopted Christianity as the official religion of the empire. He got the vineyard, as it were.

1 Kings 21:5 But Jezebel his wife came to him, and said unto him, Why is thy spirit so sad, that thou eatest no bread?

1 Kings 21:6 And he said unto her, Because I spake unto Naboth the Jezreelite, and said unto him, Give me thy vineyard for money; or else, if it please thee, I will give thee another vineyard for it: and he answered, I will not give thee my vineyard.

1 Kings 21:7 And Jezebel his wife said unto him, Dost thou now govern the kingdom of Israel? arise, and eat bread, and let thine heart be merry: I will give thee the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite.

1 Kings 21:8 So she wrote letters in Ahab’s name, and sealed them with his seal, and sent the letters unto the elders and to the nobles that were in his city, dwelling with Naboth.

1 Kings 21:9 And she wrote in the letters, saying, Proclaim a fast, and set Naboth on high among the people:

1 Kings 21:10 And set two men, sons of Belial, before him, to bear witness against him, saying, Thou didst blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone him, that he may die.

1 Kings 21:11 And the men of his city, even the elders and the nobles who were the inhabitants in his city, did as Jezebel had sent unto them, and as it was written in the letters which she had sent unto them.

1 Kings 21:12 They proclaimed a fast, and set Naboth on high among the people.

1 Kings 21:13 And there came in two men, children of Belial, and sat before him: and the men of Belial witnessed against him, even against Naboth, in the presence of the people, saying, Naboth did blaspheme God and the king. Then they carried him forth out of the city, and stoned him with stones, that he died.

1 Kings 21:14 Then they sent to Jezebel, saying, Naboth is stoned, and is dead.

1 Kings 21:15 And it came to pass, when Jezebel heard that Naboth was stoned, and was dead, that Jezebel said to Ahab, Arise, take possession of the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, which he refused to give thee for money: for Naboth is not alive, but dead.

1 Kings 21:16 And it came to pass, when Ahab heard that Naboth was dead, that Ahab rose up to go down to the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, to take possession of it.

1 Kings 21:17 And the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying,

1 Kings 21:18 Arise, go down to meet Ahab king of Israel, which is in Samaria: behold, he is in the vineyard of Naboth, whither he is gone down to possess it.

1 Kings 21:19 And thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus saith the LORD, Hast thou killed, and also taken possession? And thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus saith the LORD, In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine.

1 Kings 21:20 And Ahab said to Elijah, Hast thou found me, O mine enemy? And he answered, I have found thee: because thou hast sold thyself to work evil in the sight of the LORD.

1 Kings 21:21 Behold, I will bring evil upon thee, and will take away thy posterity, and will cut off from Ahab him that pisseth against the wall, and him that is shut up and left in Israel,

1 Kings 21:22 And will make thine house like the house of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, and like the house of Baasha the son of Ahijah, for the provocation wherewith thou hast provoked me to anger, and made Israel to sin.

1 Kings 21:23 And of Jezebel also spake the LORD, saying, The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel.

1 Kings 21:24 Him that dieth of Ahab in the city the dogs shall eat; and him that dieth in the field shall the fowls of the air eat.

1 Kings 21:25 But there was none like unto Ahab, which did sell himself to work wickedness in the sight of the LORD, whom Jezebel his wife stirred up.

1 Kings 21:26 And he did very abominably in following idols, according to all things as did the Amorites, whom the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.

1 Kings 21:27 And it came to pass, when Ahab heard those words, that he rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his flesh, and fasted, and lay in sackcloth, and went softly.

1 Kings 21:28 And the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying,

1 Kings 21:29 Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? because he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the evil in his days: but in his son’s days will I bring the evil upon his house.

Elijah was to give a message to Ahab, condemning the seizing of Naboth’s vineyard and telling the king his destiny. “Thus saith the LORD, In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine.” In regard to his posterity, it was prophesied, “Him that dieth of Ahab in the city the dogs shall eat; and him that dieth in the field shall the fowls of the air eat.” And of Jezebel, it was said, “The dogs shall eat Jezebel by the wall of Jezreel.” From a historical standpoint, these prophecies led up to a future judgment to show the guilt of Ahab and Jezebel personally and a pending judgment upon what they represent. When Jezebel was slain by Jehu, he said, “This is the word of the LORD, which he spake by his servant Elijah the Tishbite, saying, In the portion of Jezreel shall dogs eat the flesh of Jezebel: And the carcase of Jezebel shall be as dung upon the face of the field in the portion of Jezreel; so that they shall not say, This is Jezebel” (2 Kings 9:36,37). The destiny of Jezebel, as pronounced by Elijah earlier, was then fulfilled.

The point is that chapter 21 gives a history of the relationship of church and state as it existed from Constantine on, leading up to present circumstances, which will be covered by Micaiah the prophet in chapter 22. The Micaiah prophecy tells of a future coming battle, namely, World War III. Chapter 21 is not as difficult to understand as the preceding chapter. If chapter 20 is meant to be understood as a type, we trust the Lord will provide the understanding in due time. Thus chapter 21 reviews the guilt that has been building up and the responsibility of Ahab and Jezebel. Indeed the civil and religious powers have been wanting down through the Gospel Age.

Q: What is the time setting for verse 29? When did Ahab humble himself?

A: Ahab represents the civil powers. In the Holy Roman Empire, both the dragon and the beast ruled with a high hand. That arrangement ceased, but it will briefly reoccur, for Europe wants to be united as in its former days of glory. Today the persecutions of the past are forgotten, but there was a period of time after the French Revolution when many nations were aghast at what had been done in the name of God and country with man’s inhumanity to man. And so a desire for democracy has been fostered in Europe and westward. Thus, although there was a time when the civil powers were ashamed of what had happened, they have now chosen to be mum about the subject and do not want a review of history. As a result, the populace as a whole is quite ignorant of what took place in the past.

The dragon (civil power) will not die until the end of the Gospel Age. The dragon pursued the woman (the true Church) into the wilderness, but since it was not successful in eliminating her entirely, it made preparations to attack “the remnant of her seed”(Rev. 12:14-17). The dragon cast water out of its mouth with the intention of overwhelming and drowning her, but instead the earth drank up the water. The dragon was frustrated, and the woman survived. There was shame back there over what had been done, for the dreadful type of persecution was exposed.

No wonder people do not want to hear about the persecution and the history of the misdeeds, especially those of the Roman Catholic Church! Similarly, Germany would like to hide what its people did to the Jews in the Holocaust.

Q: Does Elijah represent the feet members in exposing Papacy’s sins?

A: That could be. The feet members will pick up what others have said to a certain extent.

Many Christians in past ages—the Elijah class—foresaw the doom of mystic Babylon and the powers that be, as well as their replacement with Messiah’s Kingdom. Should we get in a position of convenience and providence, we would do what Micaiah did; that is, we would have to speak out against the church-state union and say it is doomed. We will not want to join or have anything to do with the ecumenical movement because God’s Word condemns it. Thus the voice of the Elijah class has not been stilled but carries on, and as we get nearer the end of the age, some other things are beginning to be seen much more distinctly.

Q: We have tried to keep the Elijah type sequential, and the last date thus far is 1914-1918, when he was given a preview of coming events while in the cave. In 2 Kings 2, the account again picks up Elijah at the 1918 date at Gilgal. Therefore, wouldn’t Elijah here in 1 Kings 21 have to fit the 1914-1918 time slot too, lest this portion get out of sequence? If so, this would be a message in Pastor Russell’s day rather than in our day at the end of the Harvest.

A: We are still inclined to think, as expressed earlier, that Naboth represents Christians who suffered and died much earlier in the Gospel Age. The bloodguilt that was acquired by the civil and religious powers of the past yet needs to be requited.

Some Bible students of the past, under very hard circumstances and without having access to libraries, had a good understanding regarding the destiny of the nations and Papacy. Of course that knowledge is clearer today, for the light gets brighter and brighter. Generally speaking, the Elijah class has existed throughout the Gospel Age and has understood about Papacy for some time, for “Elias truly shall first come” (Matt. 17:11). Events at the end of Elijah’s life represent the feet members. The account in this twenty-first chapter is just an insertion: “And the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying, Arise, go down to meet Ahab king of Israel, which is in Samaria: behold, he is in the vineyard of Naboth, whither he is gone down to possess it,” etc.

(1989-1991 Study)

Good-bye Great Britain

The end has come for the sovereignty of the nation that once took a stand for world freedom against all odds. By Ron Fraser

That which multiple thousands of British stock sacrificed their lives to protect, the freedom and sovereignty of the United Kingdom, has been taken by stealth, subterfuge and outright deceit from the British peoples. Dec. 1, 2009, will be recorded as the day that the Queen of England officially became a vassal of the seventh resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire.

European Union

Although an Antipodean by birth, my own heritage is British to the core. Two generations of my forebears fought on foreign soil as members of the imperial forces of the British Empire for freedom from tyranny during the first half of the 20th century. The Scottish clan from which my patriarchal forebears hail have a military history that bespeaks resistance to tyranny from Waterloo to the Alamo. It thus goes powerfully against the grain to witness the day that tyranny is imposed by subterfuge on the mother nation that spawned the drive to institutionalize freedom in the constitutions of all true Western democracies, mother England, seat of the Crown of the United Kingdom.

The last time Britain was invaded by an aggressor was by the Normans, who overcame the Saxons under William the Conqueror in the Battle of Hastings in 1066. Six centuries later there followed the “peaceful invasion” of William iii of Orange when Parliament invited him to cross the English Channel in 1688 and take possession of the British throne from the Catholic convert James ii. Until a few decades ago, British national sovereignty, the freedoms enshrined in Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the Common Law and the Act of Settlement granting assurance that no representative of Rome would ever again sit on the throne, were jealously guarded and defended by the British peoples.

That all began to change when Prime Minister Edward Heath lied to the British public, claiming that the nation joining the European Community would never endanger British sovereignty, and led them by the nose into the European Community quagmire in 1973.

Less than four decades later, on Dec. 1, 2009, British sovereignty was yielded up to a foreign imperial power without so much as a whimper from the mother of all parliaments to a foreign imperial power. Yielded up to an imperialist, Roman Catholic-majority regime, called the European Union, which some of the most astute of observers have described as “the most undemocratic of institutions.” The EU has won Britain without a cannon being fired or any blood being shed. Britain has simply capitulated in abject surrender to the modern outgrowth of what Otto von Habsburg termed a European Union with the heritage of the Holy Roman Empire. That is a heritage that represents the very antithesis of all that free Britain has stood for.

During the past 35 years, the British public have been fooled, bullied, cajoled and tricked into signing their basic freedoms away, treaty by treaty. Their elected representatives have finally endorsed a document that will enslave the peoples of the United Kingdom as lackeys to the perpetrators of the very tyranny their forefathers fought so gallantly and consistently to protect the nation from, over the past millennium.

As of December 1, 2010, the British people are no longer subjects of the Crown. They are citizens of the European Union. The monarch is now subject to the rule of the elites ensconced in Brussels, Berlin and Rome. Their immediate promise is a new wave of taxes. Ahead is an era of economic stagnation and depression, with resultant political and social instability, and, most insidious of all, a period of religious oppression.

Symbolically that coming religious oppression will be signaled by the triumphant entry in 2010 of the Vatican head of state, by invitation of the British government, to the very heart of London, to the very seat of the ancient British Crown. It will be the first official state visit of a Roman pontiff to British shores.

Three hundred and twenty years ago, the British Parliament invited a Protestant prince from the Netherlands to sail to Britain and receive the Crown, transferred from the deposed Catholic James ii, to guarantee that Rome would never again rule over Britons. Next year, the emissary of Rome, Pope Benedict xvi, will fly to London, be entertained and accommodated at Buckingham Palace, and celebrate the beatification of the modern patriarch of British Catholics, Cardinal John Henry Newman, on British soil.

How the wheel has turned!

Yet, for Britain, to paraphrase its most famous son, Sir Winston Churchill, “this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

Germany Reaffirms Sunday Law

Dec. 1, 2009, marks a historic day in Germany in more ways than one! By Ron Fraser

Coincident with the enacting of the Lisbon Treaty/EU constitution on December 1, Germany’s Constitutional Court has ruled that the nation’s capital must, akin to the rest of the country, abide by the law instituting Sunday as a day “of rest from work and of spiritual improvement” (Deutsche Welle, December 1).

Since the war, Berlin had enacted its own legislation allowing 10 shopping Sundays per year. That local ruling is now quashed. Effective from Jan. 1, 2010, Berlin must fall into line with the law institutionalizing Sunday as a day of rest and religious contemplation as contained in Germany’s Basic Law.

The actual law establishing Sunday as Germany’s weekly day of worship is enshrined in an appendix to the Basic Law under the heading, “Extracts From the German Constitution of Aug. 11, 1919 [Weimar Constitution].” There we find, under the subhead “Religion and Religious Societies,” Article 139, which reads: “Sunday and holidays recognized by the state shall remain protected by law as days of rest from work and of spiritual improvement.”

Though, under that same section, Article 137 (1) states “There shall be no state church,” the effect of the Sunday law is to institutionalize Roman Catholicism and its daughter churches as Germany’s state religion.

Those aware of the history of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation will see this move by Germany’s highest court as one step further toward enforcing Rome’s religion, not only as the state religion on Germany, but on the whole European empire enacted by treaty on this infamous day, Dec. 1, 2009.

Dan. 2:1 And in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled, and his sleep brake from him.

By comparing Scripture with Scripture, and by taking clues from the context of the first chapter of Daniel, we know that verse 1 should not read, “And in the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar.” The time sequence was as follows. Daniel was taken captive from Judah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, time was required to travel to Babylon, and then he was in training under the custody of Ashpenaz for three more years (Dan. 1:3-5). Therefore, Bible scholars who try to hold onto the King James translation say that when Nebuchadnezzar was fighting down in Israel, he reigned conjointly with his father, and therefore, this was the “second year” of his sole reign. However, such reasoning does not seem to jibe with other parts of history. Hence most scholars feel that the correct rendering should be the “twelfth year” of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. There is also the possibility that it was the “fifth year.”

“Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams, wherewith his spirit was troubled.” Why was the king troubled? First, the dream of a great image being smashed to pieces kept recurring. Second, he was disturbed because he thought the image represented him and his being blown off the scene. Therefore, the king wanted to know if his life would be cut short.

Q: In verse 5, the king said, “The dream is gone from me,” so how could he know that a great image was dashed to pieces?

A: We will discuss that question when we get to verse 5.

King Nebuchadnezzar’s spirit troubled him, so that “his sleep brake from him.” If we have a nightmare, we wake up with a start and sometimes in a sweat. Evidently, therefore, the recurring dream really affected the king.

Dan. 2:2 Then the king commanded to call the magicians, and the astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldeans, for to show the king his dreams. So they came and stood before the king.

Over and over again the king dreamed of a huge image that was shattered. With urgency, he commanded that anyone who could tell him the significance of his dream should be called in: magicians, astrologers, sorcerers, and Chaldeans. Remember, not only was Nebuchadnezzar cruel and autocratic, but he was shrewd. There was no democracy at that time, and as an absolute monarch, he was even stronger than the Persian kings, who were noted for their cruelty. Since he dreamed “dreams” (plural), it would be strange for him not to recall anything.

Therefore, his shrewdness is a factor, as will be seen.

Q: Who were the Chaldeans?

A: They were part of the Babylonian people. The Babylonian Empire consisted of many provinces with numerous diverse peoples and cultures. Chaldea was the ancient name for Babylon. Therefore, of the diverse peoples, the Chaldeans were native-born, as it were, and had been there for generations. They were the core of the Babylonian people, whereas others were captives from farther away.

Dan. 2:3 And the king said unto them, I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream.

When the king called in others to give him the understanding of the recurring dream, he said, “I have dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled to know the dream.” The fact that he now said he “dreamed a dream” (singular) seems to indicate the dream occurred several times.

Dan. 2:4 Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriac, O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation.

Notice that the Chaldeans took the lead in replying to the king: “O king, live for ever: tell thy servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation.” The Chaldeans had the most freedom to speak to this despotic king, and their reply seemed to be a reasonable request. From the portion of this verse that begins, “O king, live for ever,” through part of Chapter 7, Daniel wrote in the Chaldaic language. Before and after this segment, he wrote in Hebrew.

Because the experiences were very dramatic, the narrative goes back historically to discuss the characters involved: the magicians, the Chaldeans, and the captives from Judah, who were taken during the reign of Jehoiakim.

Dan. 2:5 The king answered and said to the Chaldeans, The thing is gone from me: if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill.

Here is a clue that the king probably remembered the dream. Observe what he said to the Chaldeans: “The thing is gone from me: if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill.”

They began to sense that, based on the king’s attitude, he knew more about the dream than he was admitting. In other words, he was testing the Chaldeans by putting them on the spot, for if when he said, “The thing is gone from me,” he remembered absolutely nothing, the magicians, soothsayers, and others could conspire to fabricate a dream and an interpretation. The king meant business. He wanted to know the meaning of the dream with no ifs, ands, or buts, and he was shrewd enough to prevent a deception. As with the Micaiah picture, the tone of his voice indicated more than his words.

“If ye will not make known unto me the dream, with the interpretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces, and your houses shall be made a dunghill.” The king’s cruelty and viciousness can be seen here. Casting the three Hebrews into the fiery furnace is another example (Daniel 3).

Nebuchadnezzar used this means of punishment for others in his realm as well. Some sadistic kings even got revenge by the abominable practice of cannibalizing the sons of their enemies; that is, they cooked and ate them.

Q: Did the king consider the others to be a threat to him? Since the dream showed the image being broken to pieces, did the king fear he would be assassinated, and thus he threatened to cut them in pieces?

A: Yes, the king’s suspicions are a part of this picture. He felt threatened, and only those in positions of influence and power could topple his dynasty. Therefore, if they could not both tell and interpret his dream, he would put them all to death. That way he would be sure to get the culprit.

Dan. 2:6 But if ye show the dream, and the interpretation thereof, ye shall receive of me gifts and rewards and great honour: therefore show me the dream, and the interpretation thereof.

The king was saying, “If you tell me the dream and give its interpretation, I will bountifully reward you with gifts and great honor.”

Dan. 2:7 They answered again and said, Let the king tell his servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation of it.

The magicians, soothsayers, etc., responded the second time: “Tell us the dream, and we will give you the interpretation.”

Dan. 2:8 The king answered and said, I know of certainty that ye would gain the time, because ye see the thing is gone from me.

The king accused the Chaldeans of stalling for time in the hope that he would calm down and not execute them.

Dan. 2:9 But if ye will not make known unto me the dream, there is but one decree for you: for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed: therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can show me the interpretation thereof.

“But if ye will not make known unto me the dream, there is but one decree for you,” that is, the decree mentioned earlier of cutting them in pieces and making their houses a dunghill.

“For ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before me, till the time be changed.”

The king continued to accuse them of stalling for time until his attitude changed and he calmed down in regard to his hasty declaration and threat.

“Therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can show me the interpretation.” Here is a hint that the king did remember something of the dream, for how could he know they were accurately telling him the dream unless he had some recollection? Also, if they could accurately tell him the dream, he would have confidence in their interpretation.

Dan. 2:10 The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said, There is not a man upon the earth that can show the king’s matter: therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such things at any magician, or astrologer, or Chaldean.

Dan. 2:11 And it is a rare thing that the king requireth, and there is none other that can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh.

Dan. 2:12 For this cause the king was angry and very furious, and commanded to destroy all the wise men of Babylon.

Dan. 2:13 And the decree went forth that the wise men should be slain; and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain.

The Chaldeans said that no man on earth could meet the king’s demand, that no other king had ever made such a request, and that only a superhuman power could comply. Hearing these words, the king was “angry and very furious” and issued the command for all the wise men of Babylon to be slain.

Verses 10-13 are self-explanatory, but the end of verse 13 becomes revealing: “and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain.” Thus we know that Daniel and the three Hebrews were not summoned with the original magicians and astrologers and that they were being discriminated against. The Chaldeans, the old-timers, were jealous of Daniel and the three Hebrews, who were not only young but also foreigners. However, when it came to the slaying, the Jews were included. As we continue, it will be obvious that Daniel did not know what was happening.

Q: If Daniel was a teenager at this time, how old were the three Hebrews?

A: About the same age, roughly speaking. Because Nebuchadnezzar took captives “of the [enemy] king’s seed,” we feel that Daniel was probably of royalty, but his prominence is not emphasized lest it vitiate his role in prophecy (Dan. 1:3).

Dan. 2:14 Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the king’s guard, which was gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon:

Dan. 2:15 He answered and said to Arioch the king’s captain, Why is the decree so hasty from the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel.

Dan. 2:16 Then Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would give him time, and that he would show the king the interpretation.

The thought would be that someone went in on Daniel’s behalf to inform the king, for later, when Daniel actually went in before the king to interpret the dream, Arioch introduced him (verse 25). Here Daniel’s message was that the king should not be hasty, for a solution was on the way.

Comment: Daniel was asking for a stay of execution.

Reply: Yes, he sought a delay at least overnight and perhaps for several days.

Dan. 2:17 Then Daniel went to his house, and made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions:

Dan. 2:18 That they would desire mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon.

Daniel informed the three Hebrews what he knew about the king, his demands, and the impending execution. His purpose was to enlist their prayers as well, for he did not feel sufficient to go to the Lord alone to ask for enlightenment. Daniel felt that four praying would be more effective than just him alone. Thus we get an insight into Daniel’s character: humility and common sense. The prayer was that they desired “mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon,” who had no answer and thus could not respond effectively to the king.

Comment: The lesson is that we should not always feel we can petition the Lord alone on our behalf, for there are times when we should ask the brethren to pray with and for us. Instead of “mercies,” Rotherham has “tender compassion.”

Dan. 2:19 Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven.

The information requested was given to Daniel, not to the three Hebrews, even though they had all prayed. The answer came “in a night vision”—presumably that very night so that they and the wise men would not be executed the next morning.

Dan. 2:20 Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his:

Dan. 2:21 And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding:

Dan. 2:22 He revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him.

Dan. 2:23 I thank thee, and praise thee, O thou God of my fathers, who hast given me wisdom and might, and hast made known unto me now what we desired of thee: for thou hast now made known unto us the king’s matter.

What a wonderful prayer Daniel uttered! “I thank thee, and praise thee, O thou God of my fathers, who hast given me wisdom and might, and hast made known unto me now what we desired of thee: for thou hast now made known unto us the king’s matter.” At the end of the prayer, Daniel brought in the other three, even though the answer went to him alone: “for thou hast now made known unto us the king’s matter.” Apparently, he felt—and this is another sign of humility—that the prayer of the four of them was effective.

Dan. 2:24 Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch, whom the king had ordained to destroy the wise men of Babylon: he went and said thus unto him; Destroy not the wise men of Babylon: bring me in before the king, and I will show unto the king the interpretation.

Daniel was solicitous not only for himself and the three Hebrew children but even for the welfare of the other wise men of Babylon. The spirit of the Lord was evident in Daniel. Because of his innate tact and concern for others, he could win and gain influence in a relatively hostile environment. Daniel said to Arioch, “Bring me in before the king, and I will show unto the king the interpretation.”

Dan. 2:25 Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste, and said thus unto him, I have found a man of the captives of Judah, that will make known unto the king the interpretation.

For self-gain and self-benefit, “Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste” and said, “I have found a man of the captives of Judah.” Thus Arioch took the credit for himself. However, his words show that he had confidence in Daniel: “I have found a man … that will make known unto the king the interpretation.”

The fact that Daniel and the three Hebrew children went on a pulse diet was character-forming (Dan. 1:12). Hence Daniel spoke and made decisions with definiteness, much like the three Hebrew children, who said, “Be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up” (Dan. 3:18). In other words, “We will NOT compromise to either you or your god. If our God is not going to deliver us, so be it, but we will not be careful.” This spirit of decisiveness, which came from character training, assisted them in their stand. This spirit will become more and more apparent in Daniel as we continue.

Dan. 2:26 The king answered and said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, Art thou able to make known unto me the dream which I have seen, and the interpretation thereof?

The king asked Daniel, “Art thou able to make known unto me the dream … and the interpretation thereof?” Nebuchadnezzar knew that if Daniel could tell the dream, then the interpretation would be true and certain. And the interpretation was his real concern, for that is what disturbed him.

Dan. 2:27 Daniel answered in the presence of the king, and said, The secret which the king hath demanded cannot the wise men, the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, show unto the king;

Daniel first emphasized that the other wise men could not answer the king. With all their wisdom and training, no revealment came from that source.

Dan. 2:28 But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. Thy dream, and the visions of thy head upon thy bed, are these;

Dan. 2:29 As for thee, O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed, what should come to pass hereafter: and he that revealeth secrets maketh known to thee what shall come to pass.

Dan. 2:30 But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living, but for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king, and that thou mightest know the thoughts of thy heart.

While issuing a disclaimer for himself (“It is not my wisdom, for I am just the channel to give you information”), Daniel said of the king, “God has favored you. You will get the answer, the interpretation of your dream.” Daniel took the credit away from himself by saying, “There is a God in heaven who reveals secrets.” We are reminded of the Apostle Paul’s words on Mars Hill.

To avoid unnecessarily offending his hearers, he spoke of the unknown God. Daniel used similar tact—he was not derogatory about the Babylonian gods.

“This secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any [others who are] living, but for their sakes [for the welfare of those whose lives are at stake] … shall … the interpretation [be made known] to the king.”

Dreams are usually related to something that has just happened. A distorted word, picture, statement, etc., goes into the brain and triggers the dream. King Nebuchadnezzar was concerned about his future. He had great plans and was in the midst of building a wonderful city, and now he wondered if he would be able to complete the city. As far as he could see, the dream was all negative. It was a shattering experience.

Daniel not only told the king the dream but also told him what preceded the dream: “You have been thinking of late about your future, and then you had this dream.”

Dan. 2:31 Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.

Dan. 2:32 This image’s head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,

Dan. 2:33 His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay.

Dan. 2:34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.

Dan. 2:35 Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.

In verses 31-35, Daniel told King Nebuchadnezzar the dream. As for appearance, basically speaking, the image was composed of various metals that were used in descending order to show a deterioration in value. The order was gold, silver, brass (or copper), iron, and clay.

We had suggested that the king probably had some knowledge of his dream but that his recollection was blurred or distorted. However, he remembered enough to know immediately if someone telling him the dream was speaking truth or a fabrication. The image in the dream, or vision, was awesome (“terrible”) in both form and size. In addition, a brilliant light was associated with the image. The pure metals—without alloys, corrosive elements, or oxidation—had a natural sheen that was startling in their brightness. Imagine seeing a shining golden head, silver arms and a chest reflecting light, and a brass belly and thighs with a sheen. Even the iron in the legs and feet may have had a brightness. In fact, everything would have shone except the clay—but in differing degrees of glory.

Not only was the image bright and awesome, but the dream kept reoccurring to King Nebuchadnezzar (he “dreamed dreams” plural), so he was agitated about his future (Dan. 2:1). With his undiscerning mind, it was difficult for the king to have this dream, let alone to try to interpret its various parts. What the king would have understood is that the image was destroyed utterly and blown off the scene, and to the king, this destruction portended his own assassination. This thought gives more credibility to his threat that if the magicians, soothsayers, astrologers, and Chaldeans could not “make known” unto him the dream and give the interpretation, they would be cut in pieces and their houses made a dunghill (verse 5).

For the king to make such a radical statement, even though he was impetuous, shows he was very disturbed about the dream. (If we have ever had a nightmare, we know how unsettling a dream can be.) When Daniel started to explain the dream and the appearance of the image, the king knew immediately that the words were miraculous. Something else is apparent in the narrative: the image was a statue. The king did not see a huge human being but a statue of a huge personage.

The dream must have been an overpowering experience for the king. The “brightness [of the image] was excellent” in that the statue was glorious in appearance—yet it was shattered. Thus there were two extremes: (1) The statue was awesome, but (2) it was completely demolished. In other words, the dream had wonderful portent but also a most ominous aspect that greatly disturbed the king.

The description of the statue is self-explanatory. The only somewhat questionable part is the statement that its feet were part iron and part clay. Some translations say “miry clay,” and others say “potter’s clay,” which is more accurate, for “miry clay” suggests quicksand.

Comment: The New International Version uses the term “baked clay.”

Reply: Yes, that is the correct thought, for brittle baked clay would completely shatter, whereas unbaked potter’s clay would just crumble. When baked clay is broken, it shatters suddenly.

The position of the feet of the image merits discussion. As is usually the case with myths, Roman and Greek mythology is based on distorted facts, or truth, and the Biblical explanation about the fallen angels’ producing progeny through human females provides the answer about the half-gods or demigods. “And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose” (Gen. 6:1,2).

When we first came into the truth and saw a chart with a beautifully executed color picture of the image in Daniel 2, we noticed that the feet looked peculiar because they were not separated, and we wondered how the artist came to that conclusion. The image ended with one form of a foot that had ten toes. In other words, the two feet were solid and appeared like mummified feet. For years, that drawing puzzled us—and even up to very recently. However, now we see that the artist knew more than was first realized. In Chaldaic, the word translated “feet” in the King James Version is singular all four times (verses 33, 34, 41, 42). Although the word is third person, masculine, singular, the translators thought it had to be “feet” for the account to make sense. “How could the image be smitten on only one foot?” they asked. The answer is that the two feet were one foot.

And we had trouble equating the ten toes of the image here in Daniel with the ten horns of the beast in Revelation 17:3,7,12,16 when there are definite tie-ins between the fourth empire of Daniel and the beast of Revelation. Almost all Bible scholars who think prophetically about the beast agree that the ten horns refer to Europe, and even more or less Western Europe.

Historically speaking, therefore, the ten could be identified in the past, although, of course, depending on what period of history is being considered, sometimes there were eight horns, sometimes 12, etc. What disturbed us is that the Roman Empire was divided into two parts, east and west. (To better position himself for a world empire, Constantine moved the capital to Constantinople, now called Istanbul, which was closer to Asia.) The division is shown by the two legs of iron and the ten toes on the image. Normally, two legs would be separate, and so would the two feet, with five toes on each foot. We were troubled in connection with Europe, yet other clues in the Book of Revelation and in history seemed to indicate the image pictured Western Europe. How, then, could the unification of the ten powers at the end of the age be pictured by separate legs and feet?

It has taken 57 years for the answer, or solution, which is as follows. The scholars cannot get around the fact that there must be two feet, so to make sense, they say the word “foot” in the third person, masculine, singular, is dual. In other words, they say the word “foot” really means “two feet.” However, the image is an “Osiride” figure. Osiris was a god of Egypt, and mythology speaks a lot about Osiris, the false messiah, Satan’s messiah, who appeared on the scene even before Jesus because as soon as Satan gets a hint from God, he is ready with a counterfeit. Mythology tells of the different deeds of Osiris—but mostly after he expired and was made the god of the underworld, the god of death. Before Osiris died, he had a flail, a crook, and a cross, but after death, he reigned in the underworld. The point is that in some drawings, the upper part of his body is pictured as normal, but the lower part is shown as being mummified, suggesting impending doom and death. (The same is true of King Tut. In his tomb, he assumes an Osiride figure.) In effect, then, while the legs could be seen as two, there was no air space between them. Some statues of Osiris show him clothed and having two legs, but the two feet are together.

Therefore, the stone will smite the image on its foot (singular)—on the Achilles’ heel, to be more exact. The fact that the image was glorious but it terminated in the strange mixture of iron and clay shows an obvious change from strength to weakness. It is interesting that very little is accurately known in history about the head of gold and King Nebuchadnezzar. The amount of historical knowledge increases downward on the image, yet the head was the glorious part. Thus more is known about the arms and breast of silver (Media-Persia) than the head of gold (Babylon), more is known about the belly and thighs of brass (Greece) than the silver portion, and more is known about the legs of iron (Rome) than the brass. Historians are way off base in not appreciating the role of Babylon as they appreciate the role of the Caesars, Alexander the Great, and Napoleon. From the standpoint of worldly accomplishments and power, King Nebuchadnezzar was one of the greatest.

Comment: For verse 35, The Jewish Publication Society of America’s translation of The Writings– Kethubim reads, “All at once, the iron, clay, bronze, silver and gold were crushed, and became like chaff of the threshing floors of summer; a wind carried them off until no trace of them was left. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.”

The words “all at once” are significant. Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible has, “Then were broken in pieces at once….”

Reply: Yes, the suddenness is inherently shown in the context. That is why the Pastor used the term “Armageddon crash.” Today we would use the analogy of an atomic or hydrogen blast, which vaporizes its target, and wind is involved with the tremendous implosion.

As has been said, the king was probably in the twelfth year of his reign. Nebuchadnezzar was noted for his brilliant, skilled works of architecture, among which were the Hanging Gardens of Babylon, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. According to tradition, even Daniel was an architect. The prophet was supposedly responsible for the workmanship of a certain building that was still standing in the days of Josephus.

Now comes the interpretation, the main thrust of the vision.

Dan. 2:36 This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king.

Once again, notice Daniel’s native humility in saying, “This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation.” In giving the interpretation, he accredited the three Hebrew children, who had prayed with him. And in so doing, Daniel was also honoring the God of the Hebrews above the false gods of Babylon.

Comment: In connection with the prayers of the three Hebrews, verses 17 and 18 say, “Then Daniel … made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, his companions: That they would desire mercies of the God of heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon.” Now the plural “we” in verse 36 seems to imply that the three Hebrews were next to Daniel when he gave the interpretation.

Reply: The account does not so state, but we are inclined to think that Daniel asked to have the three Hebrews conducted in with him to see the king. His motive would be to have the others honored as well. However, he was the spokesman before the king. In writing this book, Daniel gave credit to the three as being on a level with him—except for the interpretation of dreams.

Q: In regard to Daniel’s being brought into King Nebuchadnezzar’s presence along with the three Hebrew children and giving the interpretation of the dream, does this whole scenario have a prophetic application or lesson?

A: That is an interesting question. If prophetic, the account would be another corroboration of the three classes of feet members at the end of the age. Similarly, Gideon had three bands, Noah had three sons, the Ark had three stories, three wise men were on the scene at the time of Jesus’ birth, and three Hebrew children were cast into the fiery furnace. The thought of the three Hebrew children also being on hand in Daniel 2 fits the other pictures, although their presence is not directly stated. Daniel’s use of the pronoun “we” implies their presence and makes the assumption reasonable. Daniel did not want to take credit above the other three, who had also participated in petitioning God for enlightenment.

Dan. 2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

The king would have been very pleased with Daniel’s initial words: “Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.”

Incidentally, Daniel’s commendation favors this being the twelfth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign instead of his second, for it took time for the king’s accomplishments to manifest power, strength, and glory and for him to make Babylon a great empire.

Q: Does verse 37 indicate the point in time when the Times of the Gentiles began?

A: The Times of the Gentiles are not shown in the image at all, and that is where the problem occurs. In this chapter, there is no hint whatsoever of seven or seven times. Moreover, even the mention of “seven times” in Daniel 4:32 does not apply to the Times of the Gentiles. That “seven” has a completely different meaning, as we shall see when we get to Daniel 4, Lord willing. The Times of the Gentiles are taught in Leviticus 26.

Dan. 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.

Verse 38 sounds like the commission given to Adam, who was the king of the animal creation.

The kings of Babylon are usually pictured as lions with a man’s head.

Egypt was a world empire prior to Babylon. In other words, the image in Daniel 2 begins with the Babylonian world empire and thus ignores Egypt. In 625 BC, which was the fourth year of Jehoiakim (originally called Eliakim), Nebuchadnezzar succeeded his father and became the king of Babylon. This period in history is hazy. The Bible gives both the third and the fourth year, so the year depends on whether the perspective is Hebrew or Chaldean. Therefore, the destruction of the city of Babylon occurred many years after Daniel was taken captive and even many years after he was honored.

Dan. 2:39 And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.

“Thou, O king, … art this head of gold. And after thee shall arise another kingdom [Media18 Persia] inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass [Greece], which shall bear rule over all the earth” (Dan. 2:37-39). In Daniel 7:4, the Babylonian Empire is portrayed as a lion. The two silver arms of the image picture Media and Persia. Greece is represented in the image by the belly and thighs, which are, appropriately, the more flexible and wiggly part of the anatomy. Being dexterous and agile as well as swift, the leopard is also a fitting symbol of Greece (Dan. 7:6). Noted for his speed, Alexander the Great conquered the world in nine years, but he died at the peak of his success.

Dan. 2:40 And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.

“The fourth kingdom [Rome] shall be strong as iron.” The Roman Empire was renowned for its strong, ironlike, rigid, inflexible rule and law. A Roman citizen had much advantage over others. With its “great iron teeth,” the Roman Empire broke in pieces, subdued, and devoured the whole earth (Dan. 7:7).

Dan. 2:41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.

Dan. 2:42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.

“Whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided.” The sense in which the kingdom was “divided” was in the composition of the materials that constituted the foot of the image: “part of iron, and part of clay.” In other words, the division did not refer to the two legs, which were composed just of iron. Only the ten toes and the foot part of the image had a dual composition. They had the strength of iron but the weakness of clay: “there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.” Clay is imitation stone.

For “broken,” the King James margin is better with the word “brittle.” “And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly brittle.” Inherently the toes and foot manifested a weakness. Of course the image was intact when Daniel first saw it, but the brittleness of the baked clay indicated a structural weakness.

Dan. 2:43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

In regard to “miry clay,” the clay had to be soft initially in order to be molded, but after it was baked, it was brittle. Therefore, the account is talking about the origin of the baked clay—it was a particular type of earth, almost like mud. The descending order of the materials comprising the image was gold, silver, brass, iron, and mud.

“Whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men.” Who are the “they”? The nominal Church, the false followers of Christ, the supposed Christian Church, mixes with the “seed of men,” that is, with civil governments. Just as the clay is compared to and mixes with the iron, so the nominal ecclesiastical element is compared to and mixes with the “seed of men”—politicians and civil rulers. “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God” (James 4:4). This admonition was never really heeded by the nominal Church, for it was thought that the greatest favorable development occurred when Emperor Constantine became a Christian. Even though he subsequently killed some of his own family, the nominal Church glories in his supposed conversion.

Comment: The Revised Standard has, “As you saw the iron mixed with miry clay, so they will mix with one another in marriage, but they will not hold together, just as iron does not mix with clay.”

Reply: The intermingling is a political marriage. Revelation 17:1,2 shows the relationship of the harlot and the kings of the earth, the civil aspect. The Christian Coalition and others advocate the breaking down of the separation of Church and State as written into the Constitution of the United States. They urge the Church to vote and get into politics to improve the government.

Not only do they see nothing wrong with political activities, but they think it is a Christian duty to be the conscience of the world. They ask, “How can you better influence the government than to join it?” Many Christians have fallen and gotten contaminated on the very principle of joining, fraternizing with, and trying to help others in a worldly association.

Comment: Where the King James has, “They shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay,” Rotherham has even stronger words: “And whereas thou sawest the iron combined with the miry clay, they shall be combined with the seed of men, but shall not cleave firmly one with another,—lo! as iron is not to be combined with clay.”

What is a weakness—Church and State combined in the present age—the nominal Church sees as a strength. They will see the hour of power as a dire necessity to stave off complete anarchy.

“United we stand; divided we fall” will be their worldly philosophy. Instead we should stand with and trust in the Lord. Our union should be with him.

Q: What is the timing of verse 43? Is it past? Is it future? Or is it both?

A: First, we will repeat that the “they” class (the ecclesiastical power, the miry clay) mix themselves with the “seed of men” (the civil power, the iron). This mingling, this friendship of the clerical and the civil power, is forbidden by the Word of God. For the Church to get mixed up in politics is very dangerous, and it shows a lack of understanding of Scripture and of appreciation of principles. The disposition to mingle already exists today in various ways. For example, Pat Robertson and the 700 Club are trying to intrude in the Republican Party so that the conservative religious element will have a voice in the party. In recent years, he even ran for the Republican nomination for President.

The original question was, Where are we in the fulfillment of verse 43? At present, the mingling with the seed of men is still in the preparatory stage, but in the near future, it will be much more identifiable and demonstrative. Out of desperation to hold down anarchy, the State (civil governments) will welcome the (nominal) Church in its arms, and the Church will welcome the State. Revelation 17:12,13, which is primarily a European picture, tells that the governments (the ten toes) will give their power to the beast for one hour. However, the ten toes are so integrated in politics and finances that what happens in Europe will have damaging side effects in this country, where the image of the beast (especially Evangelical Protestantism, which is adamant with regard to the Trinity) will take the leading role.

Comment: Revelation 16:13,14 applies to this same future time period: “And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.”

Reply: Yes, that Scripture is treated at length as a second foreword in the Fourth Volume. We do not yet see one unified message coming out of the mouth of the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet.

In a nutshell, then, the fulfillment of verse 43 is still future. When anarchy is a real threat, the union of Church and State will take place and be an obvious development. For instance, we have not yet reached the condition where only those who have the mark of the beast will be able to buy or sell (Rev. 13:17).

Q: In regard to the ten toes and the European Union, are there currently ten members?

A: The ten nations cannot be identified at this time. Of course the European Union pertains to commerce and currency, but these factors will drastically influence political and religious thinking. For example, if either the United States or the European economy went bankrupt, economies elsewhere in the world, such as in Japan, would likewise be shattered. The financial condition will be only one aspect of the great Time of Trouble.

When Daniel explained the dream with all its particulars to King Nebuchadnezzar, the king was satisfied. However, now, way down here at the end of the age, we are not satisfied with Daniel’s interpretation, for we see that much deeper truths are involved. Therefore, we start with Daniel’s explanation but then give an updated application and interpretation of the symbolisms involved. One such symbolism is the stone that smites the image (Dan. 2:34,35,45).

It is important to determine the true meaning of that stone.

Q: Other Scriptures show that the union of Church and State is future, but the image seems to be a timeline. Therefore, where are we in the timeline? If we are not at the point of the feet yet, of the iron being mixed with the clay, are we still in the “legs” period?

A: No, we are in the “toes” period, but it is like entering a room. We are zeroing in, but certain conditions have to develop before the stone strikes the image. The inherent weakness of Church and State can be intellectually seen, especially as we look back to the French Revolution, but the union in our day has not yet occurred.

Q: Is it possible that Daniel 2 and the hour of power are two separate pictures?

A: Such an interpretation would cause a problem because once the stone smites the image, the toes do not come together but, instead, are blown apart. In the Truth movement, there is a dearth of understanding on this subject. The prevailing thought is that the stone smote the image in 1914, but if that is the case, the toes should be gone. The picture in Daniel 2 is very dramatic, so to say that after the image is smitten, Church and State will come together is an anomaly. It is an incongruous statement that does not match the details of the vision. Our belief is that the smiting of the image is still future. The Scriptures do not equivocate. Once the stone smites the image, it would be impossible for Church and State to come together, for they will be blown apart.

There are perhaps 20 different reasons why the image has not yet been smitten. A statement in the First Volume, page 255, is significant: “The stone cut out of the mountain without hands, which smites and scatters the Gentile powers, represents the true Church, the Kingdom of God. During the Gospel age this ‘stone’ kingdom is being formed, ‘cut out,’ carved and shaped for its future position and greatness—not by human hands, but by the power or spirit of the truth, the invisible power of Jehovah. When complete, when entirely cut out, it will smite and destroy the kingdoms of this world.” The stone in Nebuchadnezzar’s vision corresponds to the Son of man in Daniel’s vision. Therefore, the stone represents The Christ. (See pages 260 and 261 of the First Volume.) The point is that the stone does not represent the nation of Israel initially, as some are now saying. Only later, after the stone has smitten the image and the Kingdom has been inaugurated, will the stone start to grow and thus picture Israel. The cutting out of the stone from the mountain represents the call of the Church during the Gospel Age. Psalm 45:10 refers to this calling out of the ecclesia of God from the kingdom of men: “Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people, and thy father’s [Adam’s] house.” The call is shown in type by Rebekah, who forgot her father Laban’s house, and by Abraham, who forgot Ur of Chaldees.

The cutting out of the stone embraces the entire Gospel Age. The call began at Pentecost, and it has continued throughout the age. For example, the Apostle Peter refers to the Church as a Temple class, and the Temple stones are still being quarried, chiseled, shaped, and prepared for placement in permanence, in contradistinction to the Tabernacle condition, the temporary residence of God in the Christian Church in the Gospel Age. Earth is the quarry for the Temple stones. Thus the cutting out of the stone, which takes place during Rome, the fourth universal empire, is progressive.

What at first seems to be incongruous is not. Back in 1878, the sleeping saints were raised from death to earth’s atmosphere. These saints, plus any who have died subsequently, are attending orientation class, where they are studying the high points of the life of each individual who has died. This way the Little Flock will know all about the human race when the various individuals go before the court of judgment in the Kingdom Age. The raised saints are not reigning yet in any sense of the word. As the Apostle Paul said, “I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you” (1 Cor. 4:8). When the reign begins, it will be a joint venture with the entire Church, not a split reign with some saints beyond the veil and some down here. The raised saints are still in earth’s atmosphere, awaiting the future collective wedding in God’s heaven and before His throne.

Notice the Pastor’s statement again: “When complete, when entirely cut out [of the mountain], it [the stone] will smite and destroy the kingdoms of this world [the image of Daniel 2].” In other words, not until the stone is complete and entirely cut out of the earth can it do the smiting.

Has the stone been entirely cut out yet? No! Otherwise, the door to the high calling would be closed. The cutting-out process will continue until the feet members receive their change.

Basically speaking, the stone Kingdom is The Christ. When Peter said to Jesus, “Thou art the Christ,” the Master responded by saying, “Upon this rock [confession] I will build my church” (Matt. 16:15-18). As stones, the saints who comprise the Church are being built up on the Rock. They are being shaped and chiseled in the present age.

Comment: If the stone were Jesus alone, it was complete at the time of his crucifixion when he was cut out of the land of the living at his First Advent.

Reply: That is right. Isaiah 53:8 says, “He [the Head] was cut off out of the land of the living,” but the body members also have to be cut out as the ecclesia, the called-out ones. They are being shaped and chiseled in earth’s quarry. In the Temple picture, the quarry was where the stones were prepared so that when they were transferred to the Temple site, no further chiseling was needed. Just as Solomon’s Temple was put together without the sound of a hammer in the type, so it will be in the antitype beyond the veil. The antitypical mountain, or quarry, out of which the stone of Daniel 2 is being cut is the present evil world down here.

Comment: Also with the Great Pyramid, the stones were quarried at another site and then transported to the Gizeh Plateau and assembled.

Reply: Yes, they were prepared at the Mokkatam Quarry.

Comment: “The stone was cut out of the mountain without [human] hands”; that is, the stone was miraculously cut out by the Holy Spirit, not by man’s efforts or government.

Reply: Yes. The other metals in the image were worked by man. The gold, silver, brass, iron, and clay were all hand-manipulated, whereas the “stone,” being natural, as found in nature, was miraculously cut out of the mountain without human hands.

Comment: In regard to the point that the image seems to be a timeline, one issue is that the whole image is there and intact until the stone strikes. We might think the Babylonian, Media- Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires have long been off the scene, but the dream pictures all of these as being present, as still existing and influencing society and government. At a definite point in time, yet future, the stone will smite the entire image.

Reply: Yes, even though the world empire is in the past, the people, the lineage, is still here. Daniel told Nebuchadnezzar, “Thou art this head of gold,” but when did the king become the head of gold? This occurred at the start of his reign, which was 19 years before 606 BC, or 625 BC. However, the time period is not really in the image except in a broad sense. The Babylonian Empire, the head of gold, ceased at the time of Belshazzar’s Feast. And the date of the termination of the other empires can be ascertained, but we are more interested in the present time here at the end of the Harvest. In fact, there is no time element in this dream at all except that it does show a progression: head of gold, arms and breast of silver, belly and thighs of brass, etc. “And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth” (Dan. 2:39). The fourth kingdom followed, and the stone, the Kingdom of God, will become the fifth world empire.

Comment: Under the Law, an altar was not to be made of hewn stone (Exod. 20:25). That directive seems to fit here with the stone not being cut out with human hands.

Reply: In other words, the prohibition in the type fits the antitype with the stone, which received no human tooling. (Of course Ezekiel’s Temple, another picture, is an exception.)

Comment: In contradistinction, clay is imitation or man-made stone. The true stone will smite the false stone.

Reply: “Christendom,” meaning “Christ’s Kingdom,” is the clay.

Peter’s confession “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” prompted Jesus to say, “You are of that stone material.” Since the consecrated recognize Peter’s confession, they, too, are of that rock material. This class, rich in faith, who are called of God and come to Jesus, laying their little all on the altar, are of the stone that is being cut out of the earth.

The quarry is only one picture. Another is the jewel picture. The 144,000 jewels taken during the Gospel Age are rough in the present life, but they are chiseled and shaped by Christ, the High Priest, the Lapidarian, the Refiner. Of course God is in the picture too, but He uses Jesus as the more immediate Master Workman in connection with the Church’s development.

Even though we are told to work out our own salvation, we would be miserable failures if we proceeded according to our whims; hence we are God’s workmanship (Phil. 2:12; Eph. 2:10). He overrules our mistakes so that they can be stepping-stones. For any who become members of the Little Flock, the credit will go to God for His workmanship through Christ. Such individuals are truly suppliant under the Master Workman’s hands.

The entire cutting out of the stone occurs during the Roman period, so the stone is a later development in the dream. Notice the word “till” in Daniel 2:34, “Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands.” The Roman Empire, which existed before the Christian Church, developed slowly until it eventually got stronger than Greece and succeeded it.

Logic would say that when the stone smote the image in the king’s dream, it had to be lifted up in order to smash the image on the feet. The stone was lifted up and thrust with great force.

The cutting out of the stone occurs down here, and the extracting pictures the change to spirit conditions. Then later, when the stone does the smiting, it will come down on the feet. The point is that the cutting out is progressive down through the Gospel Age, whereas the smiting will be sudden. In the preparation of the stones for Solomon’s Temple, the stones were all cut out and prepared in the quarry and then later transferred to the new site for the erection of the house of God.

Dan. 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

The expression “in the days of these kings” does not refer to the feet of the image but to the toes, the extremities, the last part of the body. (As used in Genesis 3:15 to refer to the last members of the Church, the “heel” is also an extremity of the foot.) Therefore, we could say, “In the days of these ten toes shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom.” The raising of the sleeping saints to spirit condition in 1878 is certainly part of this process, but the process will not be complete until the last members are taken. In the Chaldaic, the cutting out is even more dramatic, suggesting that the last members are whisked away. They are cut out suddenly.

When the stone strikes the image, the resulting despoliation will not be progressive. The breaking, shattering, crumbling—whatever term is used—will be sudden. Rotherham and certain Jewish Bibles clearly support this thought. The stone represents the stone class and, even more pertinently, not those who are merely tentatively called to be priests and kings, a royal nation, etc., but the complete Church beyond the veil, which is still future. The suddenness is also shown by Rotherham in Daniel 2:34,35. “Thou didst look until that a stone tare itself away not by the aid of hands, and smote the image upon its feet, which were of iron and clay, — and they were broken in pieces. Then were broken in pieces at once the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver, and the gold, and became like chaff out of the summer threshingfloors and the wind carried them away, — but the stone that smote the image became a mighty rock and filled all the land.”

Isaiah 30:13,14 defines what the breaking of a potter’s vessel (that is, the “smiting”) means: “Therefore this iniquity shall be to you as a breach ready to fall, swelling out in a high wall, whose breaking cometh suddenly at an instant. And he shall break it as the breaking of the potters’ vessel that is broken in pieces; he shall not spare: so that there shall not be found in the bursting of it a sherd to take fire from the hearth, or to take water withal out of the pit.” This text shows two things: (1) a complete shattering into small pieces and (2) a bursting—nothing gradual.

When a dried, baked clay vessel is smashed with a hammer, it does not gradually disintegrate but breaks SUDDENLY. It is interesting that Isaiah 30:14 mentions a “potters’ vessel.”

Comment: Isaiah 30:12-14 is helpful in the RSV: “Therefore thus says the Holy One of Israel, ‘Because you despise this word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and rely on them; therefore this iniquity shall be to you like a break in a high wall, bulging out, and about to collapse, whose crash comes suddenly, in an instant; and its breaking is like that of a potter’s vessel which is smashed so ruthlessly that among its fragments not a sherd is found with which to take fire from the hearth, or to dip up water out of the cistern.’”

Another interesting point is the promi se given to the church of Thyatira: “And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father” (Rev. 2:26,27). The last portion “even as I received of my Father” means that the privilege of the breaking, or shattering, is given to Jesus but that the Church will be identified with him in the work of breaking the potter’s vessel “to shivers.” “Shivers” is an old-fashioned word that implies even the sound of the sudden shattering. While the promise was given to the church of Thyatira, all of the promises to the seven churches are future. The marriage is future, the receiving of the divine nature is future, the Church sitting in Jesus’ throne is future, having power over the nations is future, etc. Therefore, if the promised privilege of breaking the nations like a potter’s vessel is future, the smiting of the image also has to be future.

There are about 20 reasons why the smiting is still future, only several of which have been presented here. For anyone to carefully consider the reasons and then persist in giving the smiting a past application is going against all considerations.

Comment: What we see happening today is not the smiting and can be likened to conditions before the Flood of Noah’s day. The years of lust, violence, and evil being in men’s hearts continually were interactions between man and Satan, whereas God’s judgment, the Flood, was immediate, not a process. The same principle applies to God’s destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, which was also immediate. Everything that preceded is comparable to conditions that exist today.

Reply: Yes, the fall of Jericho is another example of suddenness. The breaking of the earthen vessels of Gideon and his band of 300 also occurred quickly. Giving the smiting a past 1914 application has inhibited the understanding of prophecy. That is why we rarely, if ever, hear the details of prophecy discussed from the platform today. In fact, we have felt so strongly on this subject for the last 20 or so years that when a speaker has tried to emphasize a gradual, progressive application, we have not been able to contain ourselves. Page 255 of the First Volume states the matter so clearly—that not until the stone is entirely cut out and raised to power will it smite the nations. Brethren with the past view think they are so loyal to Pastor Russell, but actually they differ on certain points—as we do too when we feel Scripture differs. The Bible is the bottom line in understanding truth. A “thus saith the LORD,” properly understood, should answer the question.

Comment: Revelation 19:11-15 is related to the promise to the church of Thyatira read earlier: “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.”

Reply: Yes, that text is very much to the point, but we must understand the time setting. Jesus’ garments are stained with blood, so he is returning from the destruction, from treading the wine press, and the Church, the “armies … in heaven,” are with him. Since we do not yet see Babylon destroyed, this setting is future, as is Isaiah 21 with the train of camels and the train of asses matched. When the watchman saw the paired animals, he said, “Babylon is fallen, is fallen,” meaning Babylon is destroyed, for the animals and their riders were coming back from the destruction (Isa. 21:9). If the stone truly smote the image in 1914, we should see some evidence down here of its growth. When the stone smites, it will displace the nations suddenly. Of the various theories with regard to 1914, one is that the concept of the divine right of kings was shattered at that time. However, the smiting is not the shattering of a theory but the shattering of Gentile powers. As Daniel said to King Nebuchadnezzar, “Thou, O king, art a king of kings [the head of gold]: for the God of heaven hath given thee [not a paper kingdom but] a [real] kingdom, [with] power, and strength, and glory” (Dan. 2:37).

When the stone is prematurely defined as natural Israel, the date 1948 is given, but throughout the Gospel Age, it is the stone class of spiritual Israel that has been in process of being cut out.

Spiritual Israel must be entirely cut out before the stone can smite the image. After the image is displaced, shattered, and blown away, then the word of the Lord will go forth from Jerusalem.

Comment: If one has the prevailing thought that 1914 marks the time the stone smote the image, then the explanation more or less given is that the general upset among the nations and the tearing down of the social order and kingdoms are an evidence that the stone is growing. However, the emphasis of the dream is that the stone replaces the earthly kingdoms. The stone, which replaces and grows, is the fifth universal empire. Therefore, while we might see different nations falling apart and others springing up, they are all evil nations.

Reply: Yes, the nations doing the displacing at present are evil governments themselves, not the fifth universal empire, a righteous empire. What we see now is simply a different form of man’s government.

Comment: What we see happening today is comparable to the general turbulence and iniquity of mankind that existed before the Flood and before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Comment: Verse 44 says, “The kingdom shall not be left to other people.”

Comment: A past or 1914 application of the smiting of the image is incongruous with the thought of an expected future hour of power and a unifying of Church and State. The incongruity is emphasized even more when we return to Daniel 2:34,35 because after the stone smites the image, “no place was found for them [that is, for Gentile nations].” “Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.” The destruction of the image is permanent and complete. Once the former empires are knocked off the scene by the fifth universal empire, there will be virtually no place for them. One cannot say that out of the ashes will arise the Church-State union.

Reply: Instead of using the word “place,” some translations say that no “trace” was found. For example, the Revised Standard reads, “Not a trace of them could be found.” Sometimes an item is displaced, but a mark remains on the floor or rug, showing where it had been. “Not a trace” means not only taken away but nothing visible at all remaining.

Comment: It was mentioned that the stone would be cut out and then lifted up to crash down on the toes. On an accompanying picture, the artist used streaks to show that concept.

Reply: Revelation 18:21 says that an angel will lift up Babylon like a millstone and then cast it into the sea with violence. “A mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all.”

Q: Will the current Israeli polity be among the kingdoms that are replaced by the stone?

A: Yes, although the smiting picture of Daniel 2 is basically a European picture. The present Israeli government is earthly, so it will be replaced with God’s appointees.

Comment: For Daniel 2:35, the American Revised reads, “The wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found.” Psalm 37:9,10 states, “Evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth. For yet for a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.”

“And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom.” What “kings”? The ten toes—in other words, the ten toes correspond to the “[ten] kings.” (Depending on context, “kings” in Scripture can refer to either individuals or kingdoms.) What does the term “set up” mean? God will “set up a kingdom.”

Comment: The Kingdom of God will be established in power, authority, and glory, and that is when the reign of Christ will begin. God will set up the Kingdom of stone.

Reply: Yes, the Kingdom of stone first has to be extracted from the mountain, changed, and elevated. While the Kingdom class has been in process of development throughout the Gospel Age, it has to be raised to spirit power. In 1878, the sleeping saints were raised, but saints still in the flesh, as well as those not yet called, must finish their course before the stone class will be considered fully extracted from earth’s quarry, the “mountain.” “For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming [Second Presence] of the Lord shall not prevent [precede] them which are asleep” (1 Thess. 4:15).

With the thought being “in the days of these ten toes,” we see that even without specific numerics, the image has a time feature in that it is progressive. The head of gold preceded the arms and breast of silver. The silver preceded the belly and thighs of brass. The brass preceded the iron legs, and the iron preceded the mixture of clay and iron. At present, we are in “the days” of these kings, but they are not yet operating with power in the sense of the hour of power. Revelation 17:12 tells that the ten horns will unitedly give their power to the beast (Papacy) for one hour. In this time of extremity and dire trouble yet future, the Church-State mixture will be very pronounced especially in Europe, the focal point. With the number “ten” being a symbol of completeness, the arrangement between government and religion will be obvious and more or less universal throughout the Western world, including the United States.

Currently in this country, the separation between Church and State is eroding. Although the fulfillment of Revelation 17:12 has not occurred yet, we can see that it is almost on the horizon, about to happen. The setting up of the Kingdom will take place contemporaneously with the hour of power of the ten horns, or ten toes. Some of the Little Flock will still be here in the flesh during the first half of the hour of power, that is, until end-time persecution takes them off the scene. At that time, during the second half of the hour of power, the Kingdom will be set up beyond the veil. Those who have already been changed still await the marriage, so they are not exercising power or authority at the present time but are continuing to undergo an orientation or preparatory phase. When the last members receive their change, when the body is complete, then the Kingdom will have been set up.

The image remains intact today, for the stone has to be completely cut out of the mountain before it can do a smiting work. One might ask, “If the image has not been smitten, where is the kingdom of Babylon?” The answer is that the lineage, the people, are there but under another geographic name or national polity. The ten toes are in existence while the last part of the stone is being quarried; they are contemporaneous for a little while. The Kingdom will be set up “in the days [plural] of these kings.” The ten toes will be distinct when the stone smites the image.

Q: Please clarify the relationship of the stone being cut out of the mountain and its growing following the smiting of the image.

A: When the Kingdom is “set up,” it will be set up in POWER, as shown elsewhere in Daniel where this term is used. All down the Gospel Age, the stone has been in process of being cut out, but the final part of the stone will be whisked away suddenly so that there will be no one last individual, no one last saint. The feet members are a class. Elijah will be caught up as a class in the near future. The John the Baptist class will rebuke Herodias and then be beheaded. After Gideon and the 300 broke the vessels and their lights shone forth, the Midianite host experienced confusion and panic and was put to flight. The various end-of-the-age types all harmonize, but no one type gives the whole picture. When the types are combined, great understanding results.

The point is that the ten toes must be in existence before the stone smites them, but how long before is the question. At most, it will be only a very short time, and then the feet members, the last portion of the stone, will be suddenly taken away (“whisked out” in the Chaldaic).

Q: Is the stone’s smiting the image the same as the setting up of the Kingdom?

A: No, for the setting up of the heavenly phase of the Kingdom must precede the smiting. The Christ must first be glorified, or set up in power in heaven. Not until the stone is fully cut out and glorified will it smite the image.

Q: How can Revelation 19:11-15 be harmonized with Isaiah 63:1-3, which says that Jesus will act alone? “Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength? I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the winevat? I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment.”

A: No one picture shows all of the details. Isaiah 63:1-3 says Jesus is alone, but the saints in white garments are right behind him. The armies are with him. Jesus will get the credit, but the entire stone, The Christ, smites the image. Revelation 2:26,27 shows clearly that the stone includes the Church: “And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations [the image]: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.” This text, a direct reference to the smiting picture of Daniel 2, shows the Church will be involved.

Comment: Psalm 149:5-9 furnishes helpful details: “Let the saints be joyful in glory: let them sing aloud upon their beds. Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a twoedged sword in their hand; To execute vengeance upon the heathen, and punishments upon the people; To bind their kings with chains, and their nobles with fetters of iron; To execute upon them the judgment written: this honour have all his saints. Praise ye the LORD.”

Reply: Yes, this Psalm indirectly supports the smiting picture, as do many other Scriptures. The stone has to be fully cut out and empowered before it can hit the image. To give the smiting a past application, many have tried to say that when the sleeping saints received their change in 1878, the Kingdom was set up and, therefore, the smiting could take place. However, such an application confuses the picture, for how could 90 percent of the stone be complete in heaven and 10 percent of the stone still be down here in the flesh? How could the Kingdom be set up in power in heaven while some are still here? Not until the stone is fully cut out can it even begin to smite. To say the stone smote the image in 1914 is a fallacy, a confused picture. The original picture, so simple and clear, harmonizes with many other Scriptures.

Comment: The word “kings” helps to foster the 1914 date for the smiting in regard to the divine right of kings. However, verse 44 does not have to be speaking about the divine right of kings, for the word “kings” is used liberally throughout the Bible in many different contexts.

Reply: Yes, those who hold to the 1914 date try to say that the First World War shattered the theory of the divine right of kings, but it did not, for a number of countries still have Church and State together. Examples are Sweden, the Netherlands, and England.

Comment: A while back, but long since 1914, nine kings or queens attended a funeral.

Q: If the stone has smitten the image, where is the evidence it is growing and filling the earth?

A: When the stone smites the image, it will replace the present kingdoms. Moreover, when this event takes place, it will be a sudden occurrence.

What is the significance of the stone’s smiting the image on its toes? As the toes and the heel are extremities of the body, so the smiting will take place at the end of the age. In other words, the image picture has a time allotment. The world empires were successive and sequential, and, as shown elsewhere in Scripture, the lease of power to the Gentiles (that is, Gentile Times) did expire in 1914. Therefore, legally, the nations should be evicted, but just as in everyday life, the expiration of the lease is one thing and the eviction of the tenant is another.

Comment: Daniel 7:12 is pertinent here: “As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.”

Reply: That “season and time” is not 360 days (years). A time period is inferred but not specifically mentioned. The time period of the image includes the eviction, which will mark its end. Leviticus 26 shows the legal aspect of Gentile Times, whereas Daniel 2 shows the eviction, or demolition, of the image.

Comment: Along another line, the death sentence was given to Adam, but time was required for it to take effect. The same principle applies to the judgment pronounced on the earth in Noah’s day, which was 120 years before the Flood.

Reply: Yes, the illustration of Adam is a good one. He was told that in the “day” he ate of the forbidden fruit, he would die. However, from God’s standpoint, that “day” was a thousand-year day, and Adam, who died at age 930, had to expire within that time period.

The point is that the entire Church smites the image. Those who claim the image is already smitten say that it is being ground to powder and that the smiting occurs in stages: (1) the image is smitten, (2) the image is ground to powder, and (3) the wind blows the chaff away.

But instead of a progressive picture, the smiting is likened to a sudden EXPLOSION.

Comment: If the image was smitten in 1914, a number of the Little Flock were not even called, let alone conceived and born, by that date. Therefore, it would be impossible for them to share in the smiting work as promised in Revelation 2:26,27.

Comment: For the end of verse 44, “it [the stone Kingdom] shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever,” the word “consume” is the Hebrew suph, which means “end,” not a process. The stone will break the kingdoms in pieces and end them— period!

Comment: Aside from the chronology or timeline aspect showing that the stone hits the feet at the end of the age, the stone will strike the weakest part of the image, which is the iron and clay mixture representing Church-State union. In 1914, the Church-State relationship was not destroyed. Furthermore, since that time, the papal beast has been rising out of the bottomless pit to greater ascendancy. In recent years, we saw the papal influence working in conjunction with Western governments to successfully topple communism.

Reply: The sentiment of the United States in 1914 was strongly anti-Catholic. However, in Mussolini’s day (1927-1929), Papacy began to emerge from the bottomless pit. At present, not only is Papacy out of the pit, but it is doing a lot of talking and is flexing its muscles. And then, from a practical standpoint, the image could not have been smitten yet, for the governments are still here. Babylon (the present-day Iran), Media-Persia (which embraces Syria, Assyria, and Arabia), Greece, and Rome are all involved in one way or another. The image will be destroyed at once. Therefore, since we see the image still in existence, how could the smiting have occurred? How can it be smitten and yet still be standing? As has been said, their lives are prolonged for a season and a time (Dan. 7:12).

Q: If the theory were true that the image is being ground to powder, wouldn’t the Roman Catholic Church be the first element to disappear of the Church-State union?

A: Yes, as clearly shown by other Scriptures.

Comment: From 1914 to 1997 is a period of 83 years. If the image truly were smitten in 1914, then the little evidence we see indicates that the entire smiting process would seemingly take forever, far into the Millennium.

Dan. 2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

“The stone was cut out of the mountain without hands”; that is, the stone is cut out by the Holy Spirit, the invisible power of God, and not by human effort. After being entirely cut out, the stone will break “in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold.”

Notice that while the stone smites the feet, Daniel 2:34,35 describes the image in reverse order, from bottom to top. “Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet…. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them.” The general thought is that the stone smote the image in 1914 and that ever since, the image has been gradually crumbling and going down, but the Scriptures show an instantaneous explosion upward. The explosion occurs all at once, starting at the feet and going upward to the head of gold and outward, so that the image is blown away. The components of the image are “broken … together,” not in sequence.

Comment: In the 1977 study, the statement was made that the setting up of the Kingdom will have a distinct and real beginning. It will not be gradual. Then the following verses in Daniel were cited because they use the term “set up” or “stand up,” clearly showing in context that they mean reigning in power and authority.

1. “In the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever” (Dan. 2:44).

2. “Be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up” (Dan. 3:18).

3. “And for the majesty that he gave him, all people, nations, and languages, trembled and feared before him: whom he would he slew; and whom he would he kept alive; and whom he would he set up; and whom he would he put down” (Dan. 5:19).

4. “Now will I show thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia. And a mighty king shall stand up, that shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will” (Dan. 11:2,3).

5. “From the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days” (Dan. 12:11).

Comment: From a practical point of view, after Daniel interpreted the dream to King Nebuchadnezzar, he said, “The dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.” In other words, “This will surely come to pass.”

Reply: We can see the character of Daniel. Knowing the king would be stunned, he finalized the interpretation in this manner.

Comment: In the July 1, 1915 Reprints, page 5716, the Pastor plainly said, “The smiting of the image, which will grind it to powder, will come not from the church in the flesh, with carnal weapons, but from the church in kingdom glory, backed by divine power.” It is hard to understand why so many brethren hold to the 1914 date.

Reply: The Pastor did make statements that have since caused problems because he thought that in 1914, the Little Flock would be complete, the nominal Church would be destroyed, etc.

Therefore, when the First World War started and the United States subsequently got involved, he considered that to be the end of Gentile power. For several months, he wrote as if the Armageddon crash, the smiting of the image, was then happening. These statements were not technical explanations but more or less off-the-cuff remarks. However, he later corrected himself on those very points. Moreover, when all of the Pastor’s writings are considered, the future view of the smiting is favored. But what really matters in the final analysis is what the

Scriptures say. To say we should be Bible students more than Pastor Russell students does not demean him as the special messenger to the Church at the end of the Gospel Age. We must put first things first.

For Daniel to end with “the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure” is dynamite. In other words, the dream is DEFINITE.

Dan. 2:46 Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and worshipped Daniel, and commanded that they should offer an oblation and sweet odours unto him.

Dan. 2:47 The king answered unto Daniel, and said, Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldest reveal this secret.

Stunned, King Nebuchadnezzar “fell upon his face.” Any pride was momentarily shattered. In addition, he “worshipped Daniel” because he realized Daniel had told him the truth in declaring that the interpretation came from the God in heaven and that he, the king, was being favored with understanding. Therefore, the king worshipped Daniel as an ambassador or representative of the great “God of gods,” and Daniel did not have to tell him to get up on his feet.

Nebuchadnezzar’s attitude was proper, for he said, “Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing thou couldest reveal this secret.”

Daniel was merely the channel through which the information came.

Dan. 2:48 Then the king made Daniel a great man, and gave him many great gifts, and made him ruler over the whole province of Babylon, and chief of the governors over all the wise men of Babylon.

King Nebuchadnezzar greatly elevated Daniel, giving him many great gifts and making him ruler over the whole province and chief of the college of the magi. In other words, Daniel was given civil as well as religious honors. Although at the time, the other wise men were humiliated, the religious honors became a thorn in the flesh to them as the effects of Daniel’s interpretation subsided. Jealousy became a definite factor.

Comment: For the moment, the wise men were thankful that Daniel’s interpretation had spared their lives.

Dan. 2:49 Then Daniel requested of the king, and he set Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego, over the affairs of the province of Babylon: but Daniel sat in the gate of the king.

We see Daniel’s humility that in this moment of adulation, he calmly requested honor also for Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego for their part in the interpretation. Daniel’s attitude is one  reason why he was “greatly beloved” by God (Dan. 9:23). The understanding was mechanically given by God, but Daniel’s making a vow to eat pulse, his requesting honor for the three Hebrew children, etc., were of his own doing.

King Nebuchadnezzar’s homage to Daniel has a spiritual application. As the head of gold, the king was part of the image and hence represents Gentile government. His giving honor to Daniel and the three Hebrews pictures giving honor to the Jewish people. Spiritually speaking, after smiting and demolishing the image, the stone will represent Israel, and it will grow. That growth will be Israel outward. The New Covenant will be made with the nation of Israel, and the other nations of earth will come into that covenant through Israel. Thus the honor shown by Nebuchadnezzar to Daniel and the three Hebrews pictures the nations of earth saying, “Come, … and let us go up … to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem” (Isa. 2:3).

This second chapter of Daniel is comforting and enlightening because it shows there is a definiteness to God’s character, time, plan, and purposes. Daniel’s manifesting faith in saying, “The interpretation is sure,” was later copied by the three Hebrew children in their refusal to bow down to the golden image on the Plain of Dura. “If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up” (Dan. 3:17,18).

“Daniel sat in the gate of the king.” In other words, Daniel handled the more difficult problems from the king’s court. In this picture, Daniel represents Israel, “the children of thy people” (Dan. 12:1). Unlike the honoring of Daniel at Belshazzar’s Feast, the account here does not state that Daniel was given a change of garments (in the antitype, he does not receive a change to glory). Rather, the worship of Daniel and Daniel’s God represents the honor and deference the Gentile powers will ultimately give to Israel. Daniel’s sitting in the gate of the king pictures Israel as the earthly representatives of Zion, the Church in glory, the heavenly authority. It shows the radical change in rulership that will take place at the inauguration of the Kingdom.

Comment: It is interesting that God planned, or permitted, all these Gentile empires and then gave the dream to Nebuchadnezzar and allowed Daniel not only to interpret it but also to write down this prophecy for us.

Reply: Yes, we appreciate God’s Word as a lamp unto our feet, and we also appreciate the faithful messengers of the past.

Comment: In regard to Daniel’s sitting in the king’s gate, Scofield says, “Compare Genesis 19:1, Lot the compromiser, with Daniel the inflexible.”

1997

The Women of Revelation

It would not be difficult to form a tolerably complete dictionary, of the meaning of the Apocalyptic symbols, by placing over-against each, passages of Scripture in which the same symbol is employed in contexts which indicate its meaning; or in historical narratives, ceremonial observances, or legal enactments, which throw light upon it. To search the Scriptures, is to find the solution of many a difficulty in this book, for it is more closely related to the rest of the Bible than would by superficial readers be supposed.

We proceed, however, briefly to examine two of the leading prophecies of the Revelation, a clear understanding of which is, of itself, sufficient to determine its whole scope and character. They are two of the most important symbolizations in the entire series, they occupy several whole chapters, and are alluded to in others; they are closely related to each other, and one of them is divinely interpreted. This is the vision of BABYLON THE GREAT, in the seventeenth chapter of the book, a prophecy which, by its synchronical connection with almost all the other predictions of the Apocalypse, furnishes a most valuable clue to the meaning and application of the whole series of visions. This prophecy has besides, a solemn practical importance, rendering it peculiarly needful that it should be rightly interpreted.

Immediately prior to the fall of Babylon, described in the 18th chapter of Revelation, a voice from heaven cries, “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, that ye receive not of her plagues; for her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.” Is it not all-important that Christian people should be very clear as to the system thus solemnly denounced by a voice from heaven? And similarly, immediately after the fall of Babylon, “a great voice, as of much people in heaven,” is heard saying, with reference to it, “Alleluia; salvation, and glory, and honor, and power, unto the Lord our God; for true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand. And again they said Alleluia. And her smoke rose up for ever and ever.”…

The depravity attributed to “Babylon the Great,” the peculiarly solemn adjuration to God’s people to come out of her, and the utter and awful destruction denounced against her, all combine to attach great practical importance to the inquiry, what system is intended by this symbol?

A perusal of the 17th and 18th chapters of the Book of Revelation shows that “Babylon the Great” represents a system which should last long, exert a subtle and extensive influence, and be guilty of exceeding iniquity and cruelty. This system must still be in existence, seeing its destruction takes place simultaneously with “the marriage of the Lamb,” an event which we know to be still future; and seeing also that up to the moment of its destruction, or very nearly so, children of God will be found more or less connected with it, so that a need will exist for the urgent call, “Come out of her, my people.”

This system is prefigured as a cruelly persecuting one, as one that would “shed the blood of saints and martyrs of Jesus,” one on whom the Lord God would “avenge the blood of his servants.” The Lord Jesus Christ, who loves his Church, foreseeing the existence and career of this terrible system, forewarned, and thus fore-armed her by this prophecy. He furnishes her with abundant marks whereby the foe may be recognized, and solemnly warns her against making any truce or compromise, while he stimulates and encourages her for the long and bitter conflict by a view of the final result. He would have his people in no perplexity or doubt on so momentous a question, so he has made this prediction peculiarly clear; has placed it in marked and intentional contrast with another prophecy, which makes its meaning still clearer; and he has added besides, an explanation which leaves no room for the candid student to err.

Let the reader note the contrasted features of the two symbolic prefigurations:

Jezebel a.k.a Babylon the Great prophetically

“The Whore That Sitteth Upon Many Waters.”

“Babylon The Great.”

“There came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying, Come hither; I will show unto thee the judgment of THE GREAT WHORE that sitteth upon many waters.

“So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.

“And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication. And upon her forehead was a name written, Mystery, BABYLON THE GREAT, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.

“And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus” (Rev. 17:1-6).

The Bride of Christ, The Lamb's Wife

“The Bride, The Lamb’s Wife.”
“The Holy Jerusalem.”

“There came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will show thee THE BRIDE, the Lamb’s wife.

“And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and showed me” (the bride, the Lamb’s wife, under another symbol) (Rev. 21).

“To her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white; for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints” (Rev. 19:8).

This Bride is described as “THE HOLY JERUSALEM descending out of heaven from God, having the glory of God; and her light like unto a stone most precious” (Revelation 21).

The dragon “persecuted the woman,” and “the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ” (Rev. 12:13-17).

As to Babylon John adds, “when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration. And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman. …The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. The waters are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues….And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth” (Rev. 17:7).

These prophecies present two broadly contrasted women, identified with two broadly contrasted cities, one reality being in each case, doubly represented as a woman, and as a city. The harlot and Babylon are one; the Bride and the heavenly Jerusalem are one.

It is evident that the true interpretation of either of these double prefigurations must afford a clue to the true interpretation of the other.

The two women are contrasted in every particular that is mentioned about them; the one is as pure as purity itself, “made ready” and fit for heaven’s unsullied holiness; the other, foul as corruption could make her, fit only for the fires of destruction.

The one belongs to the Lamb, who loves her as the bridegroom loves the bride; the other is associated with a wild beast, and with the kings of the earth, who ultimately hate and destroy her.

The one is clothed with fine linen– righteousness; the other is attired in scarlet and gold, in jewels and pearls, gorgeous indeed, but with earthly splendor only.

The one is represented as a chaste virgin, espoused to Christ; the other is mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.

The one is persecuted, pressed hard by the dragon, driven into the wilderness, and well-nigh overwhelmed; the other is drunken with martyr blood, seated on a beast which has received its power from the persecuting dragon.

The one sojourns in solitude in the wilderness, the other “reigns in the wilderness” over peoples, and nations, and kindreds, and tongues.

The one goes in with the Lamb to the marriage supper, amid the glad hallelujahs of heaven; the other is stripped, insulted, torn, and destroyed, by her guilty paramours.

We lose sight of the Bride amid the effulgence of heavenly glory and joy, and of the harlot amid the gloom and darkness of the smoke that “rose up for ever and ever.”

It is impossible to find in Scripture a contrast more marked; and the conclusion is irresistible, that whatever one may represent, the other must prefigure its opposite. They are not disconnected visions, but a pair–a pair associated, not by likeness, but by contrast.

Now, Scripture leaves us in no doubt as to the signification of the emblematic bride, the Lamb’s wife, the heavenly Jerusalem. We read, “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” “For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.” The purpose of Christ’s love, as regards his blood-bought church is, that she should be with him, and be one with him forever; that she should behold and share his glory, being perfectly conformed to his image. Here, in prophetic vision, we see this blessed design accomplished, and the complete and perfectly sanctified church, clad in spotless robes of righteousness, brought to the marriage supper of the Lamb. We see her persecuted like her Lord, and like her Lord and with her Lord, glorified. Beyond all question, the New Jerusalem bride represents the true church of Christ.

What then must the contrasted symbol, the Babylonian harlot, represent? Surely some false and apostate church, some church which, while professing to belong to Christ, is in reality given up to fellowship with the world, and linked in closest union with the kings of the earth; a worldly church, which has left her first love, forgotten her heavenly calling, sunk into carnality and sin, and proved shamelessly and glaringly faithless to her Lord.

Be it observed, that these symbols, a woman and a city, prefigure definite systems, corporate bodies, not merely a multitude of similar but disconnected individuals. The tares of a wheat-field, the bad fish in the net, may represent such; but here we have neither true Christians nor worldly professors, as individuals, but two corporations, two definite bodies. The true church of Christ is a body; its members are united in the closest union to their Head and to each other; one life animates them: “Because I live, ye shall live also;” one spirit dwells in them; they are one habitation of God. The link that unites them is, however, a spiritual one; the body is consequently visible as such. A false church can have no such spiritual link. The bond that unites it must therefore be carnal, outward, visible; the church represented by Babylon must be a visible church, an earthly corporation, and as such capable of being discerned and recognized…. The woman and the city are one–if we can discover the name of the city, we shall be able to identify the church intended.

The Vatican

The last words of the angel to John seem to leave no possibility of mistake as to the city. “The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sitteth….And the woman which thou sawest is that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” What city was that? There was but one great city which, in John’s day, reigned over the kings of the earth. It was ROME: and Rome is the only city that was great then, has been great–in one way or other ever since, and is so still. And Rome was seated on seven hills–”the seven mountains on which the woman sitteth.” Her common name with the classic writers of St. John’s age, is “the seven hilled city;” an annual festival used to be held in honor of the “seven hilled city;” every Latin poet of note, during a period of five hundred years, alludes to Rome’s seven hills. The medals and coins of the day represent Rome as a woman sitting on seven hills; and her titles show, with sufficient clearness, how thoroughly she reigned. She was styled “the royal Rome;” “the mistress of the world;” “the queen of nations.” Her sway was all but universal. She was the metropolis of that fourth great empire which Daniel had foretold would break in pieces and subdue all things, “dreadful and terrible and strong exceedingly;” and, at the time of the Apocalyptic visions, her power was at its height. Rome, and no other city, can be intended here; the woman is in some way identified with Rome. We previously saw that she must represent a church; now we know what church. The harlot is the Church of Rome; for simple minds there seems no escape from this conclusion. “The woman which thou sawest is that great city” “which reigneth over the kings of the earth.”

The question, however, naturally suggests itself, If the woman be identified in some way with ROME, why is her brow emblazoned with the name of BABYLON? The answer is evident; the Apocalypse is a book of mysteries; things are represented by signs; realities are veiled; and it would have been altogether inconsistent with the whole style of this prophecy to have written ROME on the harlot’s brow. The woman is a figure of the church, a corrupt, idolatrous church; that is, the symbol seen by John was suggestive of something widely different from itself; so the name with which the symbol was stamped, was also suggestive of something widely different from itself, though mysteriously similar. The harlot is “Mystery, Babylon the Great.”

Names were formerly given as expressions of character or work; as, for instance, Mary was commanded to call her child’s name Jesus, which means deliverer or saviour, because he should save his people from their sins. The name Babylon, applied by the Spirit to the Church of Rome, expresses her character for Babylon means mixture– confusion (see Lev. 18:23). This union of the woman (church) with the beast (empire) constitutes the spiritual harlotry of which she is guilty.

But the same (Babylon) applies to her entire family; her daughters inherit both her nature and name, for she is a “mother of harlots,” and her works they do. Some of her daughters have followed very closely in her footsteps, in mixing Church and State. Such are “The Church of England” and other State Churches. And such would other daughters be, also, if they could find empires willing to support them.

The same spirit of confusion–the Church walking in unlawful union with the world–is seen on every hand. The Church (nominal) and the world walk hand in hand, unite their interests, and make merry together. It is the worldly element and its wealth that is sought by every sect to support and sustain the Church in the degree of luxury she wishes to enjoy. Which is why it should be no surprise to us today, as we see Protestant churches compromising on God’s morals and condoning homosexuality and the such, not only among the ones who sit in the pews, but amongst the very highest in office, those responsible for the spiritual lives of the ones sitting in the pews, the ones who feed the flock.  Alas, the name Babylon is emblazoned on the brow of every sectarian system the world over! Yet they all, like the mother system, hold forth “a golden cup (the Word of God) full of abomination for (Greek, kai.) the filthiness of their fornication,” without a blush for their shame, and, in fact, ignorant of the fact that it condemns them.

But the cup of Divine indignation is now full. The Lord will have pity and patience no longer, and though, until this harvest time, he permitted wheat and tares to grow together, the imperative command now is, “Come out of her, my people.” The magnet of truth is gathering out the Jewels, and the reproaches of the world and the nominal Church are refining and fitting them for the Master’s use.

He is thus seeking out the “little flock”–the true Church–whose names are written in heaven, who, during his absence, have waited for him, searched carefully every letter of his, which would inform them of his coming and glory, and of his will concerning them; those who have made and performed the sacrifice of earthly interests, to secure with him the higher and more enduring pleasures and honors than any which the world can offer. Yes, “They shall be mine, saith the Lord, in that day when I make up my jewels” (Mal. 3:16,17).

Cyrus, who conquered the typical Babylon, and set free the typical Israel in bondage in her, is undoubtedly a type of Christ. In the overthrow of the type, not only was the capitol city (Babylon) overthrown, but the empire with all its provinces and cities. So, too, Babylon here is to fall, and it implies not merely the great city–the capitol and leading system of the apostate Church (the Roman Church)–but all under the rule of the world–all of the mixture, all of the confusion– mother and daughters.

It is Babylon that falls and is dashed in pieces in this day of the Lord, but the true and faithful virgin shall be gathered and made perfect, and, as the Bride and joint-heir, shall share Christ’s glory.

“Dear is this Church to God,
Her walls before him stand;
Dear as the apple of his eye,
And graven on his hand.”

Dan. 7:1 In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters.

In the first year of Belshazzar, king of Babylon, Daniel had his dream. Since Chapter 5 ended with Belshazzar’s death, the events in Chapter 7 took place before Chapter 5. In other words, like the Book of Revelation, the chapters are not sequential.

Dan. 7:2 Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.

What are the “four winds of the heaven [that] strove upon the great sea”?

Comment: They would be the unholy angelic powers, which tie in with the “four winds of the earth” in Revelation 7:1–3. The winds are held back until the saints are sealed.

Reply: Yes, and the fourth great beast that came out of the sea (verse 3) also relates to the Book of Revelation (13:1).

Comment: Some thoughts from the 1977 study are interesting, for they show that even though Satan is the god of this world, a struggle goes on among the fallen angels. “The ‘great sea’ refers to peoples or humanity. Hence the ‘sea’ pictures the earth from the standpoint of humanity. The four universal empires arose out of turbulent conditions in the earth. In this moving vision, the four winds of heaven strove on a stormy, windy, turbulent sea. All of a sudden a beast arose, then another, and another, and another. Since the four winds picture the unholy angelic powers, it is apparent that a struggle for supremacy over the possession of the earth has taken place among the fallen angels. This struggle is in the present evil world; it began with the Flood and still continues. Satan has been the god of this world during all four universal empires. Although he has always been the chief of the fallen angels, there has been discord among them. Despite the rise and fall of governments, Papacy is noted for its existence. Papacy characteristically has a foot on each side of an issue so that whatever side wins, the system will appear right. Even though Satan is the prince of the power of the air, verse 2 is a clue that the power of the heavens is vied for in earth’s atmosphere. Paul said we fight against principalities, powers, rulers of darkness, and spiritual wickedness in high places.

Reply: In the Book of Revelation, we discuss the troublesome sea and the fact that Satan capitalizes on it. Prior to Babylon’s coming into power, there were other strong powers or kingdoms such as the Syrians, the Medes, and the Lydians. However, Nebuchadnezzar overcame these powers to accede to the throne. In other words, an evil angel is over each nation, but Satan is the archangel over all of the kingdoms of earth. The confusion of war—of nation against nation—is caused by the rebels under his control. The sea is not  calm. The angel (Satan) who withstood Gabriel was the stronger of the two (Dan. 10:13).

Gabriel was withheld for three weeks before he could give the answer to Daniel’s prayer. When Satan took over Media-Persia, it was a transfer of power from Babylon. Next came Greece, and after Greece came the Roman Empire, which became the Holy Roman Empire. Each time Satan was “top gun.” In this unrestful condition, Satan allows his thugs to have their own rewards as long as he remains in control on the top as the prince of the demons. His “empire” is one of lust, violence, anger, etc., all of which are component parts of his own character. Whenever there is a change of empire, he gets into the cockpit of power.

Dan. 7:3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.

The four great beasts picture four universal empires commencing with Babylon.

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 Babylonian Empire is likened to a lion with eagle’s wings. A lion is called the king of the beasts because of its royal mien; that is, its big head and mouth almost completely hide the body. Similarly, the eagle is considered the king of the birds. These symbols beautifully harmonize with the golden head of the image in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Dan. 2:31,32).

Whereas Daniel 2 portrays the universal empires from man’s perspective, Daniel 7 pictures them from God’s perspective. In other words, Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel both dreamed about the same four empires but each from a different standpoint. “I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked.” This clause refers to the time when Nebuchadnezzar was reduced to insanity and humiliated for seven years. During that time he ate grass, his nails were like birds’ claws, and his hair grew like eagles’ feathers. In a negative sense a lion shows a boasting attitude, and an eagle indicates pride, being lifted up in heart. Nebuchadnezzar’s attitude was “Haven’t I myself accomplished all this glory, such as the Hanging Gardens?”

The King James marginal reference is superior: “Wherewith it was lifted up from the earth.” Prior to the plucking of his “wings,” Nebuchadnezzar boasted and his heart was lifted up with pride and feelings of superiority. “Wherewith 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.” By plucking up his wings, by abasing him, God brought Nebuchadnezzar to his senses and made him stand on his feet as a man. Then the king gave glory to God.

Why is a man superior to a beast? Because a man does not crawl or walk on four feet. (Even a gorilla, who walks a few feet, then has to bend and put his hands down.) Man is different; man is unique; man stands upright on two feet. Thus when Nebuchadnezzar came to his  senses, he stood up like a man as he should have done. No longer was he above the earth,as it were, but upon the earth. “A man’s heart was given to it” refers to the reformation, even though it was only momentary.

Dan. 7:5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.

The bear corresponds to Media-Persia. The leading characteristic of a bear is its great strength—it hugs its prey to death. What was notable about the method of warfare with this empire? With great numbers in the empire, the siege tactic was used to conquer.

The Media-Persia bear (government or empire) “raised up itself on one side” and had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth, and “they [the ribs] said thus unto it [the bear], Arise, devour much flesh.”

Comment: Daniel 11:2 reads, “And now will I show thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all.”

Reply: Yes, that verse identifies the “three ribs” as three kings, who say to the fourth king, Xerxes, “Rise up and devour much flesh.” Xerxes is known in history. He made a pontoon bridge of boats so that his army could go over to Greece. Many men did get to Greece, but there they were stranded. At first a humiliating defeat was suffered, but the numbers of men were so great that Xerxes continued, only to ultimately suffer an even bigger defeat.

Comment: Daniel 8:3 describes the ascension of the Persian portion of the empire, described here as the bear raising itself up on one side. “Then I lifted up mine eyes, and saw, and, behold, there stood before the river a ram which had two horns: and the two horns were high; but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last.”

Reply: Yes, Media-Persia is pictured as two arms and two horns (Dan. 2:32). In the original picture the bear was in repose, but when it arose, it got up on one side (just as a human gets out of bed by pushing himself up on one side). Media-Persia was a universal empire, but it had aspirations of being even larger. Although the empire controlled the East and even Egypt, the arena or frontier not yet dominated at that time was Greece and westward into Rome. Greece was a great maritime power. The Media-Persia Empire felt it could easily conquer Greece through numbers, power, and wealth, but the Lord overruled the defeat. Similarly, Napoleon, a brilliant mathematician, lost the Battle of Waterloo through a dumb (but providential) mistake.

Q: Do Daniel 8:3, which speaks of one horn coming up higher, and the bear, which rises up on one side here in Daniel 7, refer to the Persian part of the empire?

A: The two silver arms of the image picture the kings of Media and Persia. The first king of the empire was Darius the Mede, but Cyrus the Persian soon succeeded him, becoming higher. The “fourth” king was the king of Persia. Thus the Persian aspect is the higher horn, the side of the bear that rose up from the supine position to dominate, to “devour much flesh.” Combining the fragments in Chapters 7, 8, and 11 helps us to understand what happened in secular history. Xerxes lost 5 million people in the final analysis yet remained in power, for Alexander the Great and the Grecian Empire did not come on the scene until much later. Nevertheless, the defeat in trying to conquer Greece was very humiliating for Xerxes, so he learned his lesson. He forgot about the frontier and was satisfied with the current universal empire.

Dan. 7:6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.

The leopard pictures the Grecian Empire, which corresponds to the belly and thighs of brass in the image of Daniel 2. Just as that area of the body is very versatile and flexible, so a leopard is swift and agile in movement. These characteristics describe Alexander the Great, for he conquered the whole world, as it were, in just nine years chiefly through swift movements and surprise attacks. It seemed as if he covered 100 miles in one night. A leopard or cheetah is swift and powerful, and so was Alexander the Great. Whereas Persia was cumbersome and slow of movement, conquering by great numbers and siege, Greece used adroitness, military skill, and the element of surprise. The leopard well demonstrates these characteristics. In contrast, the lion is swift for perhaps a hundred yards but then tires.

It depends on its roar to paralyze prey with fright and then with a short sprint captures the prey and scrunches it with exceptionally powerful jaws.

The spots of the leopard are not emphasized here. Later on, when Papacy is partly described as a leopard, the spots become important to show diplomacy and the practice of playing both sides, being clever and adaptable.

The leopard had four wings of a fowl on its back and four heads, which picture four generals. When Alexander the Great died as a relatively young man, four generals took control of the empire. They divided the large Grecian Empire into four parts (Syria, Egypt, Greece, and Rome), and each took control of one part.

Q: If the four heads portray the four generals, do the four wings picture the four divisions or dominions?

A: Yes. A Scriptural precedent for “wings” picturing a territory or land is Isaiah 18:1, which mentions the “land shadowing with wings.”

Dan. 7:7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.

This beast cannot be equated to any one specific animal but, instead, had the characteristics of several animals and is described as “dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly.” The fourth beast, Rome, is of particular interest as the nucleus of prophecy of the Gospel Age.

Comment: Revelation 13:2 also describes a beast: “And the beast … was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion.”

Reply: That beast pictures the Holy Roman Empire, which was a later development than Pagan Rome. A composite beast, Papacy had the features of the other beasts. Its sagacity and duplicity are shown by the leopard’s spots, a feature of the Grecian Empire. The system manipulates and speaks with forked tongue. The Roman Catholic Church’s boasting of numbers would be the characteristic of the bear, the Media-Persia Empire. And Papacy had the mouth of a lion from the Babylonian Empire.

Comment: Think how Daniel would have reacted to this moving nightmare with the unprecedented beast doing these dreadful things!

Reply: Apparently, it was not a single dream but a recurring dream. When a bad dream wakes us up, we are thankful it is over, but occasionally the dream continues when we get back to sleep. Therefore, the plural “visions” probably kept repeating, as with King Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 2:1.

Q: Does the beast here in Daniel 7:7 picture Pagan Rome?

A: Yes. The Grecian Empire was relatively short term, as was Babylon in its universal conquest. Media-Persia lasted somewhat longer, but the Roman Empire endured the longest and, in fact, still exists today in some respects.

Daniel saw that the fourth beast was dreadful in appearance, terrible in its actions, and exceedingly strong. Moreover, it had “great iron teeth.”

Comment: The “iron” teeth of the Roman Empire correspond to the two “iron” legs of the image in Daniel 2.

Iron was selected to describe the Roman Empire because it is a very unusual mineral. Not only is it extremely strong, but it is inflexible. And Rome was noted for its law and “iron rule.” Purchasing Roman citizenship (as the Apostle Paul did) added a great deal to one’s stature and protection. The Roman Empire was based on unity, centralized power, and rigid rule and law.

Comment: Of the four beasts, Daniel was most concerned with the fourth. “Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet” (Dan. 7:19).

“It [the Roman Empire] devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it.” The Daniel 7 account does not treat the diversity of the Roman beast.

The bear (Media-Persia) hugged its prey to death through siege. Alexander the Great (Greece) conquered through agility, speed, and the surprise element. Rome succeeded because of its discipline and organization. It rigorously trained its officers in the art of warfare, and to disobey a Roman order brought death. There was no flexibility—one did what he was told or else. The soldiery admired the organization and discipline, for they realized it created a power within them and brought victories—and of course their reward was a share in the spoils. Sometimes the loot was so great that when they reached a certain age, they retired with what they had accumulated and then lived a life of ease away from Rome with spas, springs, etc.

Dan. 7:8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.

This beast with one head is different from the beast in Revelation 17 that has seven heads. This beast started out with 10 horns and then got “another little horn” for a total of 11. Next the little horn ate or plucked up three horns, so the final count is eight horns (10 + 1 – 3 = 8).

We find out that the seven-headed beast in Revelation ends up with an eighth head. This background helps us to understand prophecy.

By synchronizing the types, we get an added dimension. Now is the due time for such harmonization, for truth does get clearer as we proceed down the stream of time.

Twice in the Volumes the Pastor explained how the little horn plucked up three horns. The second explanation, which is on page 76 of the Third Volume, is superior. The plucking up of the three horns (the Heruli, the Ostrogoths, and the Western Exarchate) resulted in the Holy Roman Empire.

The little horn waxed great, representing the growth of Papacy. It developed eyes like a man (intelligence) and a “mouth speaking great things” (blasphemies). One of the greatest blasphemies is the claim that the pope is the Vicar of Christ. Another blasphemy, proclaimed in 1870, is that ex cathedra utterances are infallible.

This little horn was a Roman papal horn because the beast portrayed the Roman Empire and its horns were divisions of that empire. The civil powers today like to fraternize with Papacy because with Roman Catholic adherents in all nations (both the clergy and the communicants), the system provides the framework of a spy network.

Dan. 7:9 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.

The preceding verses give us a description of the night visions that Daniel saw, and he noted the details up to and including the great boasting of the little horn. Now he provided new information not in the previous eight verses: “I beheld till the thrones were cast down.” Probably Daniel had a continuing miniseries of visions because further details were narrated in a choppy fashion with interruptions. He seemed to be summarizing the troubling series of dreams.

Q: What is the thought of “cast down”? Leeser has “set down,” the Revised Standard and the Amplified have “placed,” and the New International Version has “set in place.” Also, the Scoffield footnote has “placed down.”

A: In English the thought of being “set” or “placed down” can be taken two ways. If a highminded person is humiliated, we say he is “put down,” “put in his place,” etc. The Hebrew word will have to be checked.

Q: Could the clause be a future picture of the Ancient of days (the Father) sitting with His Son and the Church? Revelation 20:4 seems to harmonize with that thought. “And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”

A: We will have to analyze the word, its background, and the three Hebrew consonants that form the word.

Comment: The Hebrew word is remah. According to Young’s the usages of that word carry the thought of “cast” or “casting down” and in one instance “impose.” For some usages the context shows a demotion. Daniel was cast into the lions’ den, and the three Hebrew children were cast into the fiery furnace.

Comment: Ezra 7:24 is the text where remah is translated “impose”: “Also we certify you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, singers, porters, Nethinims, or ministers of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose toll, tribute, or custom, upon them.” The thought of “cast down” seems like an odd usage here.

Comment: Strong’s defines remah as “to throw, set, figuratively assess.”

The “Ancient of days” is Jehovah. The Masoretic indicates a court scene here, and the sitting of the “Ancient of days” is a future picture.

His “garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool.” “White as snow” symbolizes purity of judgment, which is associated with true justice and with righteousness. His hair was like “pure [white] wool,” which pictures wisdom. Basically, the thought is of full, luxuriant growth, and hair is a symbol of consecration.

“His throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.” We are reminded of the wheels in the vision of God in Ezekiel 1. In the vision was a throne, and One was seated on that throne. The upper part of the torso was associated with fire or sun so that the facial features could not be seen, and the bottom part was seen as legs. “No man hath seen God [the delineation of His face] at any time” (John 1:18). “And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about” (Ezek. 1:27). Ezekiel also tells of four wheels, whereas Daniel just says “wheels.” Each wheel consisted of an outer wheel and an inner one. The wheels revolved, but they did not deviate sideways from their purpose. The outer and inner wheels indicate that God operates according to the plan of the ages that He designed.

Comment: God has a movable throne. Righteous judgment goes with Him at all times.

Reply: With God’s throne being down here at the time of the vision, the thought is that judgment is set in the court. All are to stand at attention.

Let us turn again to the statement “I beheld till the thrones were cast down.” Depending on context the word “cast” can be used in either a negative or a positive sense. For Daniel 7:9 another translation gives the thought of thrones being established, of their being set down in an affirmative sense. The context here seems to favor that view also. Of course the “Ancient of days” is Jehovah, and the thrones are the thrones of the Church. This seventh chapter of Daniel speaks of the Son of man as an individual, but three times the “Son of man” is shown to be a government composed of individuals with Jesus as the Head and the Church or body members as the rulers. Occupying various positions as rulers, the saints will possess the Kingdom. Verse 9 is saying that they will be placed in their positions when the Kingdom is being set up.

Dan. 7:10 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 “fiery stream [that] issued and came forth from before him [the Ancient of days]” represents judgment. We think of lava from a volcano coming down and consuming what is in its path. In this case the fire will come forth against God’s enemies.

“Thousand thousands ministered unto him” [God]. If we multiply 1,000 x 1,000, the product 1,000,000 applies to the holy angels. “Ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him.”

This even larger number pictures the world of mankind, for whom the “books” will be opened. Servile attendance is shown by these two classes.

Comment: A clue that the Little Flock, the 144,000, are not shown in this verse is that those in attendance are either “before” the throne or ministering unto God. The Church class will be in the throne.

“The judgment was set, and the books were opened.” There are different kinds of books.

One would be the records of the past lives of all individuals and their responsibilities. The world of mankind will be judged during the Kingdom Age. Revelation 20:12 also mentions “books” (plural) being opened: “And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and  the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.”

Comment: Regarding the holy angels and the world of mankind, the NIV says, “Thousands upon thousands attended him; ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. The court was seated, and the books were opened.”

Dan. 7:11 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.

Again this is new information. The little horn with eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth speaking great blasphemous words (Dan. 7:8) troubled Daniel, as did the beast with great iron teeth that committed violence.

Q: Does verse 11 correspond with Revelation 19:20? “And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.”

A: Yes, the “burning flame” ties in with the “lake of fire burning with brimstone.” The destruction of the beast is being described. In the Book of Revelation, the beast is shown to die twice; in Daniel 7 the beast dies only once. However, the one time in Daniel 7 corresponds with the second time the beast dies in Revelation. First, Napoleon humiliated the pope. Then in 1870 the papal states were taken away from Papacy, so that only the Vatican and a summer resort remained. In other words, Papacy was shorn of its temporal  power and dominion. At that very time, at the low point of Papacy, the doctrine of Papal Infallibility was promulgated. This doctrine is a more recent example of the horn speaking “great things.”

Daniel saw the end of Papacy (the beast slain), the books opened, and the judgment set. The slain beast is the fourth beast, and its body being destroyed pictures the loss of temporal  dominion. Papacy, a civil government with clerical attire, will be “given to the burning flame.” From this second death, there will be no resurrection.

Revelation 13:3 tells of the first death of the beast and of its resurrection: “And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.” Revelation 17:8 tells of its permanent extinction. “The beast … shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition.” The second time the beast dies, it will go into the “lake of fire burning with brimstone,” from which there is no resurrection.

Q: Are verses 11 and 12 fulfilled before verse 9?

A: Yes. As said earlier, these visions are recorded in a choppy fashion. They were not all narrated sequentially.

Comment: The First Volume, page 260, states: “In verse 12 the prophet notes a difference between the end of this fourth beast and its predecessors. They three successively (Babylon, Persia, and Greece) had their dominion taken from them; they ceased to hold the ruling power of earth; but their lives as nations did not cease immediately. Greece and Persia still have some life, though it is long centuries since universal dominion passed from their grasp. Not so, however, with the Roman Empire, the fourth and last of these beasts. It will lose dominion and life at once, and go into utter destruction; and with it the others will pass away also.”

Reply: The subject is discussed in three Volumes with about 15 different quotations. The fact that the Pastor did not see two deaths in the Book of Revelation caused a little trouble. He admitted he had two views, and he did not know which perspective was the proper one.

Clayton Woodworth, who compiled The Finished Mystery, was familiar with the two views. He assumed the view he used was correct, but in fact, it was the wrong one. In one place in the Volumes, the Pastor said that the body of the beast, its temporal dominion, was destroyed forever in 1870 but that it still existed as a sacerdotal or religious power and would get great power in the hour of power. However, the Book of Revelation shows that Papacy will have temporal dominion at the time of its final destruction, and today it is a papal state. As just read, the First Volume, page 260, said that “dominion and life” would be destroyed “at once.” But the Second and Third Volumes reflect the problem of there being two deaths of Papacy and the Pastor’s seeing only the one. His uncertainty can be seen in certain statements he made. Incidentally, in 1929 Papacy got back its temporal power through Mussolini’s Concordat.

Dan. 7:12 As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.

The lives of the three other beasts were prolonged in regard to the smiting of the image, for not until the stone smote the image on its feet did the entire image fall. At the time of the smiting, the head of gold, the arms and breast of silver, etc., still had life (but not dominion).

Thus Daniel 2 shows all being consumed at the same time. The account here in Daniel 7 concentrates on the fourth beast, but all four beasts will be destroyed together. The point is that the words “season” and “time” are used in different ways in Scripture. (Similarly, for example, the term “water” has different meanings depending on context.)

“Yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time.” Sometimes we give a specific chronological application to the terms “season” and “time.” The Book of Daniel uses not only the 360-day cycle but also the thousand-year cycle. Here an even longer cycle is intended. In other words, there is precedent in the Book of Daniel for various time periods.

An example of the 360-day cycle is the 2,520 years, and the 1,000-year cycle is used in regard to the seven years of Nebuchadnezzar’s debasement (Dan. 4:16; 12:7).

Dan. 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

Notice “visions” plural, showing a series of visions not all in the same night. Leeser’s reads: “I looked in the nightly visions.” In other words, in the night visions that Daniel had, he saw various things.

“Behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven.” According to the usual view, the “Son of man” represents Jesus only, for didn’t he say, “All the tribes of the earth … shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory”?

Revelation 14:14 shows the Son of man seated on a cloud with a sickle in his hand. And the Fifth Volume applies the term “the Son of [the] man” to Jesus alone. However, in the Book of Daniel, the term is more comprehensive. Here “the Son of man” corresponds to the stone that smote the image. The four parts of the image in Daniel 2 harmonize with the four beasts of Daniel 7. The stone that smote the image and the “Son of man” both picture the fifth universal empire, which includes the “saints of the most High” God (see verses 18, 21, 22, and 27). The saints will be involved with the smiting of the image. Therefore, not until the Church is complete will the image be struck. With the term “Son of man” including the saints, it refers to The Christ. The “Son of man” is a multitudinous seed. “Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise” (Gal. 4:28). Just as “Isaac” represents The Christ and so does the stone of Daniel 2:45 that is quarried from earth, so the term “Son of man” in Daniel 7:13 pictures The Christ, Head and body members.

“Not until the Church shall have been completed, not until the last member shall have been changed from earthly to heavenly conditions; not until the glorified Christ shall have taken unto himself His great power to reign; and not until the end of Gentile times, will this heavenly power be hurled against the image.” In a nutshell, the Pastor is saying that the reign of Christ and the smiting of the image are future—that these events cannot take place until every last member of the body of Christ is complete. On page 83, the reasoning continues: “Then the dominion [of course the author had in mind the year 1914] will pass from these beasts, and their bodies or organizations as Governments will be given to the burning flame—turned over to destruction.” Now, pertaining to Daniel 7: “Then the beast was slain—the great and terrible beast, and his body was given to the burning flames. This is still future and therefore prophetic [earlier he put this in the past], and we may not too positively declare how it will be fulfilled. Apparently it signifies the overturn of the civil and religious systems of our day, especially of Europe [emphasis added, pointing out the ten horns of the beast]. It seems to symbolize the destruction of all earthly government and authority. This [that is, the fire] would mean anarchy, the most terrible curse upon society imaginable.”

“One like the Son of man … came to the Ancient of days, and they [the holy angels] brought him [the Son of man] near before him [the Ancient of days].” When Jesus finished his course, a brief hiatus of ten days occurred during which there was jubilation in heaven. Between his ascension and the application of his merit to the Church at Pentecost ten days later, the accolade went forth “Worthy is the Lamb!” The Church will have a similar experience. After the feet members are caught up in clouds to meet Jesus and the rest of the raised saints in earth’s atmosphere, and after they hear from Jesus, “Well done, good and faithful servant,” they will be taken into the heavenly court amid great rejoicing to culminate in their being The Christ class (Matt. 25:23).

Dan. 7:14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.

All power in heaven and earth has already been given to Jesus, but he has not exercised that power yet in the sense of the reign aspect. Jesus has already been exalted, but at the time of the marriage, the body members will also be glorified. The holy angels will bring the Son of man to the Ancient of days, and there will be given to the Son of man, to The Christ, “dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him,” and his dominion will be “an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.”

The statement that this dominion will never cease is very comprehensive. The reign of Christ is only for the thousand years, the Millennium, but in another sense Jesus and the Church will reign forever in the universe under God. That kingship authority will extend forever, beyond the thousand years, indefinitely. In the future, each of the 144,000 will have his own universe, his own kingdom.

Dan. 7:15 I Daniel was grieved in my spirit in the midst of my body, and the visions of my head troubled me.

Daniel was deeply grieved when he saw the vision because he sensed that it signified a long period of trouble.

Comment: The triple emphasis shows how extremely disturbed Daniel was. He was grieved in his emotions, his body, and his mind.

Reply: On one trip to Israel when there was a commotion between Arabs and Jews, an Arab remarked, “My head—watermelon!” He was trying to express his distress in English.

Dan. 7:16 I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.

In the setting of the dream, Daniel asked one who was like an angel to explain the meaning of the dream.

Dan. 7:17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.

The explanation began with the point that the four beasts represent four kingdoms or universal empires. Thus, depending on context, the word “king” in Scripture can signify a power or a government, rather than an individual. Similarly, “Pharaoh” can represent either an individual or an office that is filled by successive individuals. The same is true in this country. The President may die, but the Presidential office is perpetuated.

Dan. 7:18 But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.

Then, quickly, the explanation contained some good news: “the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom.” However, this answer was too cryptic to truly satisfy Daniel, as shown in verse 19.

Dan. 7:19 Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet;

Having seen the whole vision, Daniel desired a fuller explanation.

Dan. 7:20 And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.

Dan. 7:21 I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them;

The drama continued in another vision. More details confirmed not only that the vision portended bad news but that it was even worse than he had at first thought. An added detail is that the “little horn” power that came out of the fourth terrible beast “made war with the saints” of the most High and defeated them for a while. What a shocking experience for Daniel! The defeat and suffering troubled him. He did not fully understand the vision. He was told the kingdom would be given to the saints of the most High, and yet those saints were being persecuted.

However, Daniel’s emotions and thoughts, coming forth from his inner being as a reaction to this very traumatic vision, were edifying in the final analysis, for they developed his character even further.

How did Daniel know that he was seeing “saints”? Obviously some details of the vision are  not recorded in Scripture. We are getting only a thumbnail description. Perhaps they were pictured with a halo or white garments. At any rate, an unholy power got victory over the holy power—until the “Ancient of days [God] came” (verse 22).

Q: When Daniel saw this vision, did he recognize that the fulfillment was a long time off?

A: Yes, he sensed that fact and it was troubling him, even though he does not mention it in fullness until the end of the book. He was exhausted by the multitude of visions and explanations and disheartened by the time factor, but he was eventually given consolation. “Go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days” (Dan. 12:13).

Dan. 7:22 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.

This verse is future.

Dan. 7:23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.

Dan. 7:24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.

Dan. 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

The “ten horns … are ten kings [powers, kingdoms] that shall arise: and another [the little horn] shall rise after them.” The ten horns, plus the one little horn that subdued three horns, left eight horns. The eight horns tie in with Revelation 17, where the beast appears on the scene again but with more detail. The fourth beast of Daniel has only one head but eight horns. The beast in Revelation 17 has ten horns and seven heads plus an eighth head

when one of the seven reappears. The Book of Daniel provides background information for an updated understanding in the Book of Revelation. Daniel 7:25 explains the time period, which was future from Daniel’s day: time, times (double time), and half a time. The 3 ½ times, when converted to lunar years of 360 days each, with a day for a year, total 1,260 years. The time period thus indicated is 539 to 1799.

Q: Are the eight horns in Daniel 7 comparable to the eight heads of Revelation 17?

A: Yes. However, Revelation 17 furnishes more information, for the ten horns are a contemporary condition and the heads are successive. Today we are in the period of the eighth head.

For the little horn to “wear out the saints” suggests time. Those who were hunted and tortured during the 1,260 years experienced not only suffering but fatigue and weariness. In Revelation 6:10 the saints are portrayed as asking, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?”

The little horn shall “think to change times and laws.” For example, Papacy had the Kingdom starting with the papal millennium, which began under Charlemagne in 799 and then extended to 1799, the end of the French Revolution. The birth of Jesus was changed to Christmas. The pope is considered to be the Vicar of Christ, but where is Christ? The Roman Catholic Church teaches that one must go through the church and its arrangements rather than go through the true Head, Christ. Jesus said, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). Sinners are to confess their sins to Jesus, not to the priest.

Comment: The importance of counting ten horns, adding one horn, and subtracting three, for a total of eight, is shown by the fact this is mentioned three times in the chapter as a triple witness.

Dan. 7:26 But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.

Notice that the troublesome condition again ends up with victory. The little horn prevails against the saints, but the saints come out all right in the final analysis, for they will take away the dominion of the little horn.

Daniel was saying, “I am not so concerned about the first three beasts, but I would like more information about the fourth beast—and particularly the ominous little horn.” He was favored with such an explanation.

Dan. 7:27 And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

Dan. 7:28 Hitherto is the end of the matter. As for me Daniel, my cogitations much troubled me, and my countenance changed in me: but I kept the matter in my heart.

Although Daniel was favored with an explanation and assured that God would set up an everlasting Kingdom, he was still troubled about the events and conditions that would occur before the establishment of the Kingdom. He “kept the matter in his heart.” In other words, he thought a lot about the visions but did not reveal them to others—probably not even to the three Hebrew children. Since Daniel was taken to Babylon before the 70 years began to count and now we are near the end of his life, he may have outlived the three Hebrew children, for Daniel died a centenarian. Therefore, Daniel, as an honored servant in the king’s court, had to put on a front to cover up and suppress his concerns about the disturbed condition, for one could not go around the royal court with a sad countenance.

Nehemiah is another example. He was so troubled that he could not fully hide his thoughts. In his case,  however, it was providential that the king noticed and asked what was troubling him. “My cogitations much troubled me, and my countenance changed in [within] me.” In other words, he suppressed his thoughts  outwardly.