The Image of Daniel chapter 2

cyberdyne systems 101

I have been looking at some of the society's publications recently and was wondering what people's understanding without WTS bias was to the image?

DannyBloem

Well, I think most of us have a WTS bias....

but if you look at internet, you see some other religious groups explaining it. More or less the same, but some kingdoms details different.
In the beginning it is clear, what the meaning is, later on it just does not fit anymore, and it is very open to interpretation'.

That it start not fitting anymore, right after the time daniel was written says enough

peacefulpete

Here's a nice thread to read for starters:Daniel Made Simple!

Augustin

The four kingdoms of Daniel should/could be identified with:

(1) Neo-Babylonia,
(2) Medo-Persia,
(3) Alexander's Greece,
(4) The 'rival diadochoi' Egypt and Syria (with Antiochus IV as the little horn)

-- Augustin --

jgnat

I thought the image could apply to ANY great civilization, which starts to degrade as it ages.

For that matter, the WTBTS is starting to show it's age, no longer showing the purity of cause or dynamism of it's youth.

peacefulpete

It is likely that the writer was adapting the Greek tradition of 4 ages of man :Gold, silver, bronze, iron : Ages of Man, Greek Mythology Link.

The book itself makes clear that the kingdoms are Babylon, Persian,Media, Greece, with the Greek kingdom figuring largest in the story with Antiochus as a blasphemous horn.

Augustin

peacefulpete,

How does the Book of Daniel make it "clear that the kingdoms are Babylon, Persian,Media, Greece, with the Greek kingdom figuring largest in the story with Antiochus as a blasphemous horn"? Why do you think there is a "Media" between Neo-babylonia and Persia?

-- Augustin --

peacefulpete

I hastily reversed the order but the author of Daniel specifically says that Darius "the Mede" captured Babylon. He also describes the second king as inferior to the first , Media was recognized as a lesser kingdom than Babylon whereas Persia was far greater. We cannot expect strict historical accuracy from the author of Daniel writing using fragments of history colored with political bias.

peacefulpete

Go to the well thought out thread I linked to in my first comment. I'm just not focused today.

Leolaia

Augustin....You might want to read the classic book Darius the Mede and the Four World Empires in the Book of Daniel, by H. H. Rowley (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1959), which thoroughly explores the question. You also might want to note how ch. 6 presents "Cyrus the Persian" as the successor of "Darius the Mede" (which is even clearer in the LXX version, which rests on a Vorlage that is in many ways more original than the MT), and how Darius is presented as no co-regent of anyone else, but as a king ruling over a large empire (hence the 127 satraps).

The Image of Daniel chapter 2

Share this