Although Daniel here records the dream and does not touch on its interpretation, yet we must not proceed further without discussing the matter itself. When the interpretation is afterwards added, we will confirm what we have previously said and amplify as the context may guide us. Here Daniel records how Nebuchadnezzar saw an image consisting of gold, silver, brass, and iron, but its feet were mixed, partly of iron and partly of clay. We have already treated the name of the “Vision,” but I briefly repeat again—King Nebuchadnezzar did not see this image here mentioned with his natural eyes, but it was a specimen of the revelation which he knew with certainty to have been divinely offered to him. Otherwise, he might have thrown off all care and acted as he pleased; but God held him down in complete torment until Daniel came as its interpreter.

Nebuchadnezzar then saw an image. All writers endowed with a sound judgment and candidly desirous of explaining the Prophet’s meaning understand this, without controversy, as referring to the Four Monarchies, following each other in succession. The Jews, when pressed by this interpretation, confuse the Turkish with the Roman empire, but their ignorance and unfairness is easily proven.

For when they wish to escape the confession of Christ having been exhibited to the world, they seek stale slanders which do not require refutation; but still, something must afterwards be said in its proper place. My assertion is perfectly correct, that interpreters of moderate judgment and candor all explain the passage as referring to the Babylonian, Persian, Macedonian, and Roman monarchies, and Daniel himself afterwards shows this sufficiently by his own words.

A question, however, arises: why did God represent these four monarchies under this image? For it does not seem to correspond throughout, as the Romans had nothing in common with the Assyrians. History has fully informed us how the Medes and Persians succeeded the Chaldeans, how Babylon was besieged by the enemy, and how Cyrus, after obtaining the victory, transferred the empire to the Medes and Persians.

It may, perhaps, seem absurd that only one image should be proposed. But it is probable—indeed, it may be shown—that God does not here regard any agreement between these four monarchies, for there was none at all, but rather the state of the world at large. God therefore wished, under this figure, to represent the future condition of the world until the advent of Christ.

This is the reason why God joined these four empires together, although they were actually different, since the second sprang from the destruction of the first, and the third from that of the second. This is one point. We may now inquire, secondly, why Daniel calls the kingdom of Babylon by the honorable term golden. For we know the extent of its tyranny and the character of the Assyrians, and their union with the Chaldeans. We are also aware of the destruction of Nineveh, and how the Chaldeans made Babylon their capital city to preserve the seat of empire among themselves. If we consider the origin of that monarchy, we will surely find the Assyrians like savage beasts, full of avarice, cruelty, and rapacity, and the Chaldeans excelling in all these vices. Why, then, is that empire called the head—and why a golden head?

As to the name “head,” since that monarchy arose first, there is nothing surprising in Daniel’s assigning the highest place to it. Regarding his passing by Nineveh, this also is not surprising, because that city had already been cut off, and he is now treating future events. The Chaldean empire, then, was first in the order of time and is called “golden” by comparison, because the world grows worse as it becomes older; for the Persians and Medes, who seized upon the whole East under the auspices of Cyrus, were worse than the Assyrians and Chaldeans. So secular poets invented fables about The Four Ages: the Golden, Silver, Brazen, and Iron. They do not mention the clay, but without doubt, they received this tradition from Daniel. If anyone objects that Cyrus excelled in the noblest qualities, was of a heroic disposition, and celebrated by historians for his prudence, perseverance, and other endowments, I reply that we must not look here at the character of any one man, but at the continued state of the Persian empire. This is sufficiently probable. On comparing the empire of the Medes and Persians with that of the Babylonians, the Medo-Persian is called “silver” because its morals were deteriorated, as we have already said. Experience also demonstrates how the world always degenerates and inclines by degrees to vices and corruptions.

Then, as to the Macedonian empire, it should not seem absurd to find it compared to brass, since we know the cruelty of Alexander’s disposition. It is frivolous to notice the politeness that has gained him favor with historians, since, if we reflect upon his natural character, he surely breathed cruelty from his very boyhood.

Do we not discern in him, even as a boy, envy and emulation? When he saw his father victorious in war, and subduing by industry or corrupt methods the cities of Greece, he wept with envy because his father left him nothing to conquer. As he manifested such pride when a boy, we conclude him to have been more cruel than humane.

And with what purpose and intention did he undertake the expedition by which he became king of kings, unless through being discontented not only with his own power but with the possession of the whole world? We also know how he wept when he heard from that imaginative philosophy that there were more worlds than this.

“What,” he said, “I do not possess even one world!” Since, then, one world did not suffice for a man who was small of stature, he must indeed have put off all humanity, as he really appeared to do. He never spared the blood of anyone; and wherever he burst forth, like a devouring tempest, he destroyed everything.

Besides, what is said here of that monarchy should not be restricted to the person of Alexander, who was its chief and author, but is extended to all his successors. We know that they committed horrible cruelties, for before his empire was divided into four parts—constituting the kingdoms of Asia, Syria, Egypt, and Macedonia—how much blood was shed!

God took away from Alexander all his offspring. He might have lived at home and begotten children, and thus his memory would have been noble and celebrated among all posterity; but God exterminated all his family from the world. His mother perished by the sword at the age of eighty years, as did his wife and sons, and a brother of unsound mind.

Finally, it was a horrible proof of God’s anger against Alexander’s offspring, for the purpose of impressing all ages with a sense of His displeasure at such cruelty. If then we extend the Macedonian empire to the period when Perseus was conquered, Cleopatra and Ptolemy slain in Egypt, and Syria, Asia, and Egypt reduced under the sway of Rome—if we comprehend the whole of this period—we will not wonder at the Prophet Daniel calling the monarchy “brazen.”

When he speaks of the Roman Empire as “iron,” we must always remember the reason I have noted, which has reference to the world in general and to the depraved nature of mankind, from which their vices and immoralities always increase until they arrive at a fearful height. If we consider how the Romans conducted themselves and how cruelly they tyrannized over others, the reason why their dominion is called “iron” by Daniel will immediately appear. Although they appear to have possessed some skill in political affairs, we are acquainted with their ambition, avarice, and cruelty. Scarcely any nation can be found that was so afflicted by those three diseases—ambition, avarice, and cruelty—as the Romans were. Since they were so subject to these, as well as to others, it is not surprising that the Prophet detracts from their fame and prefers the Macedonians, Persians, Medes, and even Assyrians and Chaldeans to them.

When he says, the feet of the image were partly of iron and partly of clay, this should be referred to the ruin that occurred when God dispersed and cut in pieces, so to speak, that monarchy. The Chaldean power fell first; then the Macedonians, after subduing the East, became the sole monarchs to whom the Medes and Persians were subservient.

The same event happened to the Macedonians, who were eventually subdued by the Romans; and all their kings who succeeded Alexander were cut off. But there was another reason why God wished to overthrow the Roman monarchy: it fell by itself, according to the prediction of this prophecy.

Since, then, without any external force it fell to pieces by itself, it easily appears that it was broken up by Christ, according to this dream of King Nebuchadnezzar. It is positively certain that nothing was ever stable from the beginning of the world, and the assertion of Paul was always true: the fashion of this world passeth away ([Reference 1 Corinthians 7:31]). By the word “fashion” he means whatever is resplendent in the world is also shadowy and evanescent. He also adds that all which our eyes gaze upon must vanish away. But, as I have said, the reason was different when God wished to destroy the empires of the Chaldeans, the Persians, and the Macedonians, because this was more clearly shown in the case of the Romans: how Christ by His advent took away whatever was splendid, magnificent, and admirable in the world. This, therefore, is the reason why God assigns specially to the Romans feet of clay. So much, then, regarding the four empires.

In the third place, it may be doubted why Christ is said to have broken this image from the mountains. For if Christ is the eternal wisdom of God ([Reference Proverbs 8:15]), by whom kings reign, this seems scarcely to accord with it. How, by His advent, should He break up the political order which we know God approves of, and has appointed and established by His power? I answer—earthly empires are swallowed and broken up by Christ incidentally, as they say ([Reference Psalms 2:9]). For if kings exercise their office honestly, clearly enough Christ’s kingdom is not contrary to their power. Why, then, does it happen that Christ strikes kings with an iron scepter, and breaks, ruins, and reduces them to nothing? Just because their pride is untamable, and they raise their heads to heaven and wish, if possible, to draw down God from His throne. Hence, they necessarily feel Christ’s hand opposed to them because they cannot and will not subject themselves to God.

But another question may be raised: when Christ was made manifest, those monarchies had fallen long previously, for the Chaldean, the Persian, and that of the successors of Alexander had passed away. The solution is at hand if we understand what I have previously mentioned—that under one image the whole state of the world is here depicted for us.

Although all events did not occur at the same moment, yet we will find the Prophet’s language essentially true, that Christ should destroy all monarchies. For when the seat of the empire of the East was changed, Nineveh destroyed, and the Chaldeans had fixed the seat of empire among themselves, this happened by God’s just judgment, and Christ was already reigning as the king of the world. That monarchy was really broken up by His power, and the same may be said of the Persian empire. For when they degenerated from a life of austerity and sobriety into one of foul and infamous luxury, when they raged so cruelly against all mankind and became so exceedingly rapacious, their empire necessarily passed away from them, and Alexander executed the judgment of God. The same occurred to Alexander and his successors. Hence the Prophet means that before Christ appeared, He already possessed supreme power, both in heaven and earth, and thus broke up and annihilated the pride and violence of all men.

But Daniel says—the image perished when the Roman empire was broken up, and yet we observe in the East and the neighboring regions the greatest monarchs still reigning with very formidable prowess. I reply that we must remember what we said yesterday—the dream was presented to King Nebuchadnezzar so that he might understand all future events until the renovation of the world.

Hence, God was not willing to instruct the king of Babylon further than informing him of the four future monarchies that would possess the whole globe, obscure by their splendor all the powers of the world, and draw all eyes and all attention to themselves; and afterwards, Christ would come and overthrow those monarchies.

God, therefore, wished to inform King Nebuchadnezzar of these events. Here we must notice the intention of the Holy Spirit. No mention is made of other kingdoms because they had not yet emerged into importance sufficient to be compared to these four monarchies. While the Assyrians and Chaldeans reigned, there was no rivalry with their neighbors, for the whole of the East obeyed them.

It was incredible that Cyrus, springing from a barbarous region, could so easily draw to himself such resources and seize upon so many provinces in so short a time! For he was like a whirlwind that destroyed the whole East. The same may be said of the third monarchy. For if the successors of Alexander had been mutually united, there was then no empire in the world that could have increased their power.

The Romans were fully occupied in struggling with their neighbors and were not yet at rest on their own soil. Afterwards, when Italy, Greece, Asia, and Egypt were obedient to them, no other empire rivaled their fame, for all the power and glory of the world was at that period absorbed by their arms.

We now understand why Daniel mentioned those four kingdoms and why he places their close at the advent of Christ. When I speak of Daniel, this should be understood as referring to the dream; for without doubt, God wished to encourage the Jews not to despair when the brightness, first of the Chaldean monarchy, then of the Persian, next of the Macedonian, and lastly of the Roman, overwhelmed the world.

For what could they have determined by themselves at the time when Nebuchadnezzar dreamed about the four empires? The kingdom of Israel was then utterly destroyed, the ten tribes were exiles, and the kingdom of Judah was reduced to desolation. Although the city Jerusalem was yet standing, still, where was the kingdom?

It was full of ignominy and disgrace; indeed, the posterity of David then reigned precariously in the tribe of Judah, and even there over only a part of it. Afterwards, although their return was permitted, yet we know how miserably they were afflicted. And when Alexander, like a tempest, devastated the East, they suffered, as we know, the greatest distress. They were frequently ravaged by his successors; their city was reduced almost to solitude, and the temple profaned. And when their condition was at its best, they were still tributary, as we shall afterwards see.

It was certainly necessary for their minds to be supported in such great and confused turmoil. This, therefore, was the reason why God sent the dream about those monarchies to the king of Babylon.

If Daniel had dreamed, the faithful would not have had such remarkable subject matter for the confirmation of their faith. But when the king’s dream was spread throughout almost the whole East, and when its interpretation was equally celebrated, the Jews could recover their spirits and revive their hopes in due time, since they understood from the first that these four monarchies would not exist by any mere whims of fortune. For the same God who had foretold future events to King Nebuchadnezzar also determined what He would do and what He wished to take place.

The Jews knew that the Chaldeans were reigning only by the decree of heaven; that another, more destructive empire would afterwards arise; thirdly, that they must undergo servitude under the Macedonians; and lastly, that the Romans would be the conquerors and masters of the world—and all this by the decree of heaven. When they reflected on these things, and finally heard of the Redeemer (who was, according to promise, a perpetual King), and recognized that all the monarchies, then so resplendent, were without any stability—all this would prove no common source of strength. Now, therefore, we understand with what intention God wished what had until then been hidden to be everywhere promulgated. The Jews, too, would hand down to their sons and grandsons what they had heard from Daniel, and afterwards this prophecy would be extant and become a source of wonder to them throughout all ages.

When we come to the words, he says, one image was great and large, its splendor was precious, and its form terrible. By this phrase, God wished to meet a doubt that might creep into the minds of the Jews on perceiving each of those empires prosperous in its turn.

When the Jews, captive and forlorn, saw the Chaldeans formidable throughout the whole world and, consequently, highly esteemed and all but adored by the rest of mankind, what could they think of it? Indeed, they would have no hope of return, because God had raised their enemies to such great power that their avarice and cruelty were like a deep whirlpool.

The Jews might thus conclude themselves to be drowned in a very deep abyss, from which they could not hope to escape. But when the empire was transferred to the Medes and Persians, although they were allowed the liberty of returning, still we know how small a number used this indulgence, and the rest were ungrateful.

Whether or not this was so, few of the Jews returned to their country; and these had to make war upon their neighbors and were subject to continual harassment. As far as common sense would guide them, it was easier for them not to move a step from Chaldea, Assyria, and the other parts of the East, since their neighbors in their own country were all so hostile to them.

As long as they were tributary and regarded almost as serfs and slaves, and while their condition was so humiliating, the same temptation remained. For, if they were God’s people, why did He not care for them enough to relieve them from that cruel tyranny? Why did He not restore them to calmness and render them free from such various inconveniences and from so many injuries? When the Macedonian empire succeeded, they were more miserable than before; they were daily exposed as prey, and every species of cruelty was practiced towards them. Then, with regard to the Romans, we know how proudly they domineered over them. Although Pompey, at his first assault, did not spoil the temple, yet eventually he became bolder, and Crassus shortly afterwards destroyed everything until the most horrible and prodigious slaughter followed. As the Jews must suffer these things, this consolation must necessarily be offered to them: the Redeemer will eventually arrive, who will break up all these empires.

As to Christ being called the stone cut out without human hands, and being pointed out by other phrases, I cannot explain them now.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, since we so travel through this world that our attention is easily arrested, and our judgment darkened, when we behold the power of the impious resplendent and terrible to ourselves and others. Grant, I say, that we may raise our eyes upwards and consider how much power You have conferred upon Your only-begotten Son. Grant, also, that He may rule and govern us by the might of His Spirit, protect us by His faithfulness and guardianship, and compel the whole world to promote our salvation; thus may we rest calmly under His protection, and fight with that boldness and patience which He both commands and commends, until at last we enjoy the fruit of the victory which You have promised and which You will provide for us in Your heavenly kingdom. Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

We have already explained God’s intention in offering King Nebuchadnezzar the dream concerning the four monarchies and the kingdom of Christ that would put an end to them. We have shown it to have been not for the king’s sake so much as for the consolation and support of the remnant of the faithful in those very severe troubles that awaited them and were close at hand.

For when redemption had been promised to them, and the prophets had extolled that remarkable beneficence of God in magnificent terms, their confidence might fail them amidst those revolutions that afterwards followed. God wished to sustain their spirits, so that amidst such agitations and tumults they might remain constant, and patiently and quietly wait for the promised Redeemer.

Meanwhile, God wished to render all the Chaldeans without excuse, because this dream of the king’s was everywhere celebrated, and yet none of them profited by it, as far as Christ’s eternal reign is concerned. But this was the principal point in the dream, as we will afterwards see.

God wished, in the first place, to consult the interests of His elect, lest they should despond among those so-called revolutions, which might seem contrary to those numerous prophecies by which not merely simple liberty was promised, but perpetual and continued happiness under God’s hand. We now understand the purpose that God intended by this dream.

We must now discuss its explanation. We have already touched upon some points, but Daniel himself will lead the way along which we are to proceed. First of all, he says—

Commentaries

Albert Barnes

On Daniel 2:33

John Calvin

On Daniel 2:31–35

John Gill

On Daniel 2:33

Go Ad-Free

Matthew Henry

On Daniel 2:31–45