Companion book now available!
Your one-stop
resource for accurate information
on the wild and
wooly world of modern religious groups and teachers.
|
If this is
your first visit to the Field Guide you will find it important to read
the material in the Introduction section
before continuing your explorations here.
|
Lions and Leopards and Bears... OH MY!
(This is the final installment of this article. Click here to go to the beginning of the article.)
10
I can still clearly remember the first Bible Study meeting I attended which dealt with the interpretation of the Book of Daniel, almost 30 years ago. In fact, I still have notes written in the margins of my old King James Bible as a result of that study. At that study I also learned about "unstated assumptions"- at least I learned about them when I got home that night.
For I was very impressed with the crash course I had been given in world history related to the image and beasts in Daniel, and was eager to know more details. So I got out my encyclopedia- and, to my surprise, was quickly stumped in my effort to learn more. You see, I made the mistake of trying to look up "Medo-Persian Empire." The teacher at the Bible Study had made a point of the importance of this Empire in world history, and I had dutifully written "Medo-Persian Empire" in the margins of the Bible at appropriate points in the Book of Daniel and in Revelation, along with the dates 538-330 B.C.
Have you had a similar experience? Have you been given time charts and Empire names to put in your Bible? Since Daniel was told the details of his visions were "sealed" until "the time of the end," have you assumed God "unsealed" the book for your teacher? Have YOU ever tried to look up "Medo-Persian Empire" in the dictionary or an encyclopedia?! Try it.
I recently decided to go back and try to trace down some of the "unstated assumptions" that had been in the teachings about prophecy I had accepted for many years. I started with the "Medo-Persian Empire." As mentioned above, you only seem to find this title for an ancient world empire in the writings of Bible prophecy teachers, not in general history books or reference works.
There WAS an ancient country, in what is now northern Iran, called "Media," home to a people called the "Medes." As the 1972 World Book Encyclopedia says about this country, "The Medes reached the peak of their power under Cyaxares, who reigned from 625 to 585 B.C. Cyaxares defeated Assyria and built an empire that included parts of what are now Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Astyges, the son of Cyaxares and the last Median king, was defeated by Cyrus the Great of Persia about 550 B.C. Cyrus incorporated Median lands into the Persian Empire and made Media a Persian province."
The World Book article on "Persia" notes that Cyrus then continued to expand into other areas, seizing the kingdom of Lydia and "gradually absorbing Greek colonies in Ionia," eventually creating an Empire that he called the "Achaemenid Empire" after his ancestor Achaemenes. Given this information, it seems fair to ask where the prophecy teachers got the phrase "Medo-Persian Empire." I am sure they all have reasons for using this designation, but, as you may realize from your own similar experiences, there have obviously been many "unstated assumptions."
A similar situation arises with the next empire I have in my Daniel-Revelation notes from long ago: Next to the "belly and thighs of brass" of Daniel 2, I dutifully wrote, "Greek 333 B.C.- 31 B.C." Looking again in the World Book under the article "Greece," I now find the following comment: "The Greeks came under the control of invaders for more than 2,000 years. They lost their independence to the Macedonians in 338 B.C., and did not regain it again until A.D. 1829."
Where, then, did the prophecy teachers get the "Greek Empire 333 B.C.- 31 B.C."?! Looking under "Ancient Greece," you find that Phillip II, from Macedonia (a country north of Greece), defeated the Greeks in 338 B.C., and "reorganized Greece as part of a union with Macedonia." Alexander the Great, Philip's son, used an army of Greeks and Macedonians in his conquests, and history books do usually refer to an "Empire of Alexander the Great." However, the Romans "abolished the Macedonian Empire" in 167 B.C., and Macedonia became a Roman province in 167 B.C. Once again I ask, where did my prophecy teacher get his "Empire" labels and his dates? I'm sure he, and others like him, would have answers- but they certainly involve MANY unstated assumptions I was unaware of as a new student.
After considering these areas of "unstated assumptions," I decided to go one step farther. I was given the STRONG impression by my prophecy teacher that history itself could verify my teacher's interpretations of Daniel because, beginning with Nebuchadnezzar's empire, there were only four major world empires up to the present time. Rome was the last, and it would be "resurrected" in the End Time as the Beast of Revelation.
But I had seen that many unstated assumptions were needed to establish the teachings I had accepted about a "Medo-Persian Empire" and a "Greek Empire." So I decided to see what the history books might say about such a tidy, "four empire" history.
To my surprise, I discovered that there is AT LEAST one other Empire that rose between Nebuchadnezzar and the present that deserves at least a chance to be considered as historically significant to Bible prophecy. This empire included MORE territory than the Babylonian Empire, the Persian Empire, and the Empire of Alexander. It did not cover QUITE as much territory as did Rome at its peak, but it surely was a close "second"!
It ruled just about every significant location mentioned in Bible history except Rome itself. This includes the site of the garden of Eden, the resting place of Noah's Ark, Babylon, Ur of the Chaldees, Egypt, Jerusalem (and all of Palestine), Athens, Corinth, the cities of the "seven churches of Asia" in Revelation, Antioch- and much besides. It ruled all of North Africa west to and including Algeria, and at its height might have been said to figuratively "rule the Mediterranean Sea" itself, as its fierce naval forces were so successful.
This empire was the (Moslem) Ottoman Turkish Empire, which began about 1300 A.D., reached its height in the 1600's, and which was still an important world power in the 1800's. If you include in its history its forerunner, the (Moslem) Seljuk Turkish Empire (which began about 1000 A.D., and which was absorbed and expanded by the Ottomans), the Moslem Turks had an active history as a significant world power for over 800 years.
The "Crusades" of European history were launched against the Seljuk control of the Holy Land. The Ottomans eventually overran all of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire, taking its capital, Constantinople, in 1453, and killing the last Byzantine Emperor. It was considered a serious threat to the Western "Holy Roman Empire" at least twice, and if it had won decisive battles on those occasions, the history of the world might have been far different- all Europe MIGHT have been forced to accept the Moslem religion, in the same way much of it had been coerced into accepting Roman Catholicism.
Look closely at the maps below, and see if you agree that it would be reasonable to at least CONSIDER the Turkish Empire in the interpretation of prophecy.
ASSYRIAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT: 660 B.C.
BABYLONIAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT: 539 B.C.
MEDO-PERSIAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT: 520 B.C.
MACEDONIAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT: 323 B.C.
ROMAN EMPIRE: 117 A.D.
OTTOMAN EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT: 1683 A.D.
As a matter of fact, after coming to the conclusion on my own that the Turks deserve consideration, I found that, historically, prophecy teachers in times past DID include them in significant ways. William Miller's prophecy charts of the 1840's identify the Turks (which still were a significant threat in his time) as the "locusts" of Revelation. At least one teacher in Europe in the 1500's identified them with the Beast in Revelation, even going so far as to identify specific Ottoman rulers as the five heads of the Beast that had "fallen." So others in the past HAVE considered that the Turks were a real "world empire" on the level of Babylon, Persia, Alexander the Great's Empire, and Rome.
IF we are going to say that the interpretation of prophecy does NOT have to be based on direct, divine, revelation from God, but can be established by human reason and study, then I propose we see what adding this "world empire" might do to the reasoning process. Are you one who has thought, "What other POSSIBLE explanation could there be to the prophecies in Daniel and Revelation?" If so, I invite you to look at some possibilities you may have not considered.
11
Before considering some of the details of the specific prophecies, there are two assumptions that should be clarified:
(1)
Many prophecy teachers state that in Bible prophecy, a "king" usually signifies more than just an individual ruler.
The word "king" may mean the"office" of ruler, or even "stand for" the kingdom itself. This does seem to me a valid conclusion. The word "Pharaoh" is used in many places in the Old Testament, sounding almost like a "first name," and the reader who knows nothing of Egyptian history might mistakenly assume the same individual is meant each time. Even in our own time, you could read news clippings from 1960 and 1980 which both talk of "the President" taking some action- and you would realize two different men were intended, even though the same word was used. In like manner, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations can vote in a particular U.N. motion, and the press reports that "the United States" voted a certain way. The ambassador "stands for" the country.
(2)
Many prophecy teachers seem to proceed on the assumption that world history is divided up into neat packages that can be clearly defined, and that kingdoms rise and fall in an orderly fashion, and in obvious sequence.
But the facts I mentioned earlier in this article about the Medes, the Persians, the Greeks, and the Macedonians show that this assumption is not supportable. Prophecy teachers must not only "interpret" prophecy- they must, in a real sense, "interpret" history for their students. Even professional historians will admit that "History" is not an "exact science."
The difference in the "History of World War II" that would be presented to high school students in Germany, in America, and in Russia, should be sufficient to show this principal is valid! In addition, the way "Man" views history may not be at all the way God views history!
To get a feel for this concept, consider the different way your 10 year old child might describe the "history" of your family for the last 5 years from the way YOU might describe it. Events that loom large to him in his memory may have been soon forgotten by you, such as the day he lost his first tooth. Events that were momentous to you, such as a promotion on the job, may have meant nothing to him, even though they affected such important factors as family income.
In like manner, the last 2,500 years have seen the rise and fall of MANY more than four "kings" or "kingdoms." God evidently chose to emphasize a limited selection of these in visions to Daniel and John. I believe we should be very careful about INSISTING we know His "perspective" of history when He did not choose to explain the details even to Daniel and John.
With all of that in mind, I do NOT accept the assumption that history falls into the neat categories of most prophecy teachers.
I would now like to propose an "alternate scenario" of prophecy which incorporates the Moslem Turkish Empire. I ask that you "set aside" temporarily all of the explanations you have accepted in the past and JUST compare this scenario to the prophetic symbolism of Daniel and Revelation.
As mentioned before, many teachers speak of the "Medo-Persian" Empire, even though most historians don't make such a designation. I assume that the teachers reason that the Median Empire, which flourished before the Persians became powerful, was later "incorporated" into the Persian (Achaemenid) Empire, and the Medes themselves were an influence within that later Empire.
I do not disagree with the validity of this reasoning. In fact, I would like to invoke the same reasoning to propose another change in the "labelling" of historical categories. Although you cannot look up "Medo-Persian" in the dictionary, there IS a similar "hyphenated word" you CAN look up. That is "Greco-Roman."
I propose to you that the history of Greece (including its rule by the Macedonian Alexander the Great) and the history of Rome may appropriately be looked at as a continuum, with Rome absorbing the Greeks politically and militarily, but being influenced in many OTHER ways by the Greek civilization. For instance, Rome was the political ruling power at the time the New Testament was written. But what was the primary language of the Roman Empire? Greek! Art, architecture, philosophy, governmental forms- the Greek civilization influenced almost every facet of life. The Romans even based most of their religious system on that of the Greeks- the Roman "pantheon" of Gods was borrowed almost wholesale from the Greeks: Jupiter was just a new name for Zeus, etc. We even use the word "Hellenism" (to imitate the Hellenes- the Greeks) historically to designate the widespread influence of Greek culture. "Orthodox" Jews of the time of Christ were scandalized because many of the Jews of the Dispersion were becoming "Hellenistic."
It might even be interesting to consider that the concept of "kingdom" MIGHT be intended by God in the visions to represent broad "civilizations" rather than just limited political or military entities.
Therefore I ask "What If" the "Medo-Persian" Empire was succeeded in prophecy by the "Greco-Roman" Empire? Consider the giant image in Daniel 2. "What if" the head represents the "Babylonian" (Chaldean) Empire, the chest and arms the "Medo-Persian" Empire, the belly and thighs the "Greco-Roman" Empire- and the legs of iron the "Moslem Turkish" Empire?
The vision in Daniel 8 of the goat and the ram only talks of two Empires- the king of "Grecia" and the kings of "Media and Persia." And yet the angel tells Daniel that the vision relates to the "Time of the End." So every vision doesn't NECESSARILY cover all the same world powers. "What If" the vision of Daniel 2 doesn't include something that IS included in Daniel 7.
How would that fit with the "beasts" in Daniel 7? The Lion would be the Medo-Persian Empire, the Bear the Greco-Roman Empire, the Leopard would be the Moslem Turkish Empire- and the fourth "terrible beast" would be the same as the Beast of Revelation 13 and 17, a "unique" empire unlike all the others, something beyond even the symbolism of the image in Daniel 2.
What do I mean by "something beyond"? Revelation 13 says that the dragon (Satan) gives to THIS beast his very own power and throne and great authority. "What If" the world powers of the image in Daniel 2 are those historical governments of MAN that have been based strictly on HUMAN qualities (good and bad.)
But "What If" at the "Time of the End" an empire is set up "outside" of human history that is set up by Satan himself, empowered by him in a way no previous civilization recorded in our history books has been influenced. Certainly various individual rulers down through history have been evil. Perhaps they were even influenced by demonic forces. But note that all the "Empires" mentioned up until now also contributed to the advance of human civilization in positive ways. What if the final "Empire" is a TOTALLY evil, Satan-possessed kingdom. The angel tells Daniel in Daniel 7:23:
...The fourth beast is a fourth kingdom that will appear on earth. It will be different from all the other kingdoms and will devour the whole earth, trampling it down and crushing it.
Rome may have been more powerful than previous kingdoms, but I question that it could REALLY be described as "different from all the other kingdoms." Nor did it "devour the whole earth." Many prophecy teachers say that this will be fulfilled by its "resurrected" form at the end. But I suggest to you that the new scenario I am proposing fits the prophecies WITHOUT the need to artificially "bring back" a former empire. Why would this be important? BECAUSE- if the Beast of Revelation is NOT a resurrection of the Roman Empire, it can arise ANYWHERE on the Earth, and can have as components and as allies ANY NATIONS.
What about the concept that the Beast "Once was, now is not, and will come up out of the Abyss"? Just before the Flood of Noah's time, the world had become so evil God decided to start fresh. "What If" man had become so "reprobate" at that time that his governments were opened up to a total control by Satanic possession and the Beast "Empire" was what was destroyed in the Flood?
As a matter of fact, perhaps the attempt by Satan and the fallen angels to "overthrow God" was at least symbolically because they attempted to control man's governments when God said that it was HE who raised up leaders and brought them low. The references to at least some of the evil spirits being confined in the "Abyss" might then symbolically refer to the fact that the Beast "now is not," and also explain why it is said to "come up out of the Abyss."
One final thought- "What if" the "Beast" raised its heads up out of the Abyss at the time of World War II, a time that saw an insane, obviously demon-possessed, leader named Adolph Hitler almost devour the whole world? In fact, the world was reeling in those years from other despotic "heads" such as Mussolini, Stalin, and the warlords of Japan. And "What If" God, for reasons we will not know until we are with Him, said, "No, it isn't time yet," and pushed the "Beast" back into the Abyss?
Cyrus of Persia may have been a despot. But you might be able to make a case that civilization as a whole benefited from the GOOD things introduced by his Empire. That is perhaps also true of the other ancient Empires. Even the Turkish rulers were viewed by many of their Christian subjects of eastern Europe as an improvement over the old feudal system. But I believe the world saw in World War II the foretaste of a DIFFERENT Beast from all the others, one that
...crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left.
Dan. 7:7
I realize this rough sketch of a new scenario may leave many questions in your mind. But if it DOES seem to begin to agree with the prophecies, you might ask yourself if you owe it to yourself to begin at least CONSIDERING that you MAY NOT have totally "proven" the prophecy interpretations you have accepted.
12: Conclusion
If you were a "watchman" on the wall of a city of ancient Israel, and you knew an enemy was going to attack in the near future, what direction would you look in?
Well, if you were ABSOLUTELY convinced (perhaps because of information from spies you had sent out) that the enemy was going to approach from the North, you might be tempted to only scan the northern horizon continually. Of course, that might be pretty foolish. What if the enemy changed plans since your spies were there? What if they were "wise" to the fact you sent spies, and falsified the conversations overheard by the spies? What if the spies misunderstood the things they heard because they weren't very familiar with the language of the enemy?
Every one of those "what ifs" are reasonable possibilities, aren't they! An expert watchman would keep in mind only one fact- it is HIS responsibility to alert the city. Wouldn't it be wise of him, therefore, to scan the WHOLE horizon, all 360 degrees of it, regularly?
I believe that many who set themselves as "watchmen" to the Church, "watching" for signs of the End Times, are like the foolish watchman who "knows" where the enemy is coming from and looks only in that direction. Consider this: the Jews of Christ's time were SURE they knew the meanings of the Old Testament prophecies related to the Messiah's coming. So they were looking in "one direction" for him, looking for only one type of evidence of his identity- that He would be a conquering king. They missed Him when He came instead as the "suffering servant."
Is it possible that Christian prophecy "experts" could be SO SURE that they know in what direction to look for the "Beast," and what evidence to look for for its identity, that they may not recognize it when it rises up from the Abyss?
Watch ye therefore... and pray that you are worthy to escape all these things that are coming on the earth, and to stand before the Son of Man.
Luke 21:37
Pam Dewey
© 1989, revised, 1999, 2005
Unless otherwise noted, all original material on this Field Guide website
is © 2001-2006 by Pam Dewey.Careful effort has been made to give credit as clearly as possible to any specific material quoted or ideas extensively adapted from any one resource. Corrections and clarifications regarding citations for any source material are welcome, and will be promptly added to any sections which are found to be inadequately documented as to source.
Pam Dewey
Pam Dewey
Pam Dewey
