DANIEL’S PROPHECY OF THE CHURCH
The prophecy of Daniel has been the object of radical
criticism for many years. In my judgment, the reason for that criticism is very
simple. The book of Daniel records some spectacular prophecies. If those
prophecies were made by a sixth-century B. C. prophet, liberal theologians and
academicians have some real problems. They would have to acknowledge the
supernatural inspiration of scripture and the actuality of miracles. Since most
of them are unwilling to do that, they deny that the Daniel of the Babylonian
exile wrote the book ascribed to him. Is it significant that Jesus Christ
called Daniel a prophet (Mt. 24: I5)? Is it possible Jesus knew more about
Daniel than liberal theologians like John Shelby Spong?
Dr. Robert Dick Wilson was for many years William Henry
Green Professor of Semitic Languages and Old Testament Criticism at Princeton
Theological Seminary. There is hardly any doubt that Dr. Wilson was one the
greatest linguists in the history of the world. He knew forty-five languages,
including all of the languages associated with the Bible. Dr. Wilson wrote two
volumes entitled Studies in the Book of Daniel (Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1972, a Reprint from 1917). He quotes Dean Farrar of the
Church of England as expressing doubt of the very existence of Daniel since
Daniel's name is not mentioned on the monuments of the time. Dr. Wilson
comments: "Dean Farrar...is but a blind leader of the blind when he
attempts to speak upon such complicated matters as those which are involved in
an introduction to the book of Daniel, without having first mastered the
languages and the literature of
My concern in this brief study is not to defend the
authorship of Daniel or its place in the inspired canon. I ask you to study
with me "Daniel's Prophecy of the Church." But did Daniel really
prophesy about the church or was he prophesying about the kingdom? According to
some dispensational premillennialists, the church is an afterthought, a
contingency plan. I must say up front as kindly but as emphatically as I know
how: If the kingdom Daniel prophesied is not the church of the living God, we have
some really serious problems with the book of Daniel. When Moses announced the
prophetic office, he knew the Israelites would ask: "How shall we know the
word that the Lord has not spoken?" Please listen to the answer.
"When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not,
nor come to pass, that is the thing that the Lord has not spoken, but the
prophet has spoken it presumptuously: you shall not afraid of him" (Dt.
18:21-22). If the kingdom Daniel had in mind was not established when he said
it would be, he was a false prophet.
Nebuchadnezzar and the mighty Babylonian army conquered the
nation of
The prophet Daniel approached king Nebuchadnezzar to ask
for time. He said he would reveal the dream and the interpretation. Daniel
"went into his house, and made the thing known to Hananiah, Mishael, and
Azariah (better known to us by their Hebrew names-Shadrach, Meshach and
Abed-nego), his companions; that they would desire the mercies of the God of
heaven concerning this secret; that Daniel and his fellows should not perish
with the rest of wise men of Babylon. Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel
in a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven. Daniel answered and
said, Blessed be the name of God forever and ever: for his wisdom and his might
... I thank thee, and I praise thee, 0 thou God of my fathers, who has given me
wisdom and might, and has made known unto me what we desired of thee: for thou
hast made known unto me the king's matter" (Dan. 2:1-23).
Daniel did not take any credit for his knowledge of the
king's dream. He explained to the king: "The secret that the king has
demanded cannot the wise men, the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers,
show unto the king. But there is a God in heaven who reveals secrets, and makes
known unto king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days" (Dan.
2:27-28). Before I outline the dream and the interpretation, it is in order for
me to emphasize that modern psychics, astrologers and sorcerers have no greater
knowledge than their counterparts in ancient
Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream a great image. The image's
head was composed of fine gold, his breast and his arms were of silver, his
belly and thighs were made of brass, and his legs of iron, his feet part of
iron and part of clay. "You saw till that a stone was cut out without
hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and
broke them in 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
threshing floors; 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" (Dan. 2:31-35).
Daniel next provided the interpretation for the dream. He
told king Nebuchadnezzar: "You, 0 king... are the head of gold.... After
you shall arise another kingdom inferior to you; and another third kingdom of
brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom shall
be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and subdues all things:
and as iron breaks all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. And whereas
you saw the feet and toes, part of potter's clay and part of iron, the kingdom
shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of iron, for as much
as you saw the iron mixed with miry clay. 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. And where as you saw 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" (Dan. 2:37-43).
The Holy Spirit identified the head of gold -
Nebuchadnezzar and the mighty Babylonian Empire. There is almost universal
agreement among Bible scholars that the second kingdom was that of the Medes
and the Persians. The third kingdom was that of Alexander the Great or the
Macedonian or Grecian empire. The fourth and last earthly kingdom in Daniel's
prophecy was the
When the prophet wrote, "in the days of these
kings," what kings did he have in mind? Incidentally, Daniel has mentioned
only one king - Nebuchadnezzar. But kingdoms imply kings. So he no doubt is
speaking of the kings over those four kingdoms. In his outstanding commentary on
The Prophecy of Daniel (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1949), the late Dr. Edward Young, one of America's greatest
Hebrew scholars, quotes Dr. Oswald T. Allis's comments on the term, "these
kings": "The words 'in the days of those kings' would refer most
naturally to the four kingdoms or kings represented by the image. This
interpretation is clearly involved in the symbolism of the image (verse 45) and
is permissible because, while distinct, these four kingdoms were also in a
sense one.
The
But when the Jews rejected the king, could God set up the
kingdom? Did he not have to postpone the kingdom? Was God surprised when the
Jews rejected Christ? Have our premillennial friends ever read Isaiah 53?
Besides, time prophecies cannot be postponed. If the kingdom were not
established during "the days of those kings," Daniel was a false
prophet. Was Jesus wrong when he said the kingdom would come with power before
some of his listeners would die? If the kingdom has not come, some of those
listeners make Methuselah look like a child. The
It seems to me there are great difficulties premillennials
face is failing to recognize that the
The Apostle Paul wrote a letter to the church at Colosse.
He thanked God the Father "who has made us qualified to be partakers of the
inheritance of the saints in light: who has delivered (literally, rescued) us
from the power of darkness, and has translated us into the kingdom of his dear
Son" (Col. 1:12-13). Please remember that Paul wrote the letter to the
church at Colosse. He then affirmed that God has "translated us into the
kingdom of his dear Son." The tense of the verb "has translated"
affirms that the translation or change has already occurred. If they had
already been translated into the kingdom, does that not mean the kingdom had to
be in existence? How can people be translated or transferred into a
non-existent kingdom? The
Let us return to Daniel's prophecy for the remainder of our
time. The kingdom Daniel predicted would come "shall never be
destroyed." If you have studied history, you know that earthly kingdoms
come and go. All four of the kingdoms Daniel mentioned have "bit the
dust," figuratively speaking. The pages of history are littered with the
sad stories of past civilizations. But the
According to Daniel, the
The
The
The author of Hebrews provides wonderful insight into the
existence and into the nature of the
Nicodemus apparently was concerned about the kingdom Christ
had come to establish. Jesus said to this ruler among the Jews: "Verily,
verily, I say unto you, Except a man be born again (or from above), he cannot
see the
Winford
Claiborne
The International Gospel Hour