Thou, O king, sawest, and behold, a great image. This image was mighty and its brightness excellent; it stood before thee, and its appearance was terrible.
Daniel now recounts to Nebuchadnezzar the dream the king had lost — a single towering figure, dazzling and frightening at once. Why does world empire appear here as a man? Why does it look so magnificent? And why does the sight leave a king shaken?
The four kingdoms make up one body, and that body is human. The shape itself says who is on display.
Notice at once that the image stands for the times of the Gentiles, from Nebuchadnezzar's day until the kingdom of Christ is set up. Yet it is still one image, and the image of a man. So, as another writer has finely observed, it pictures "the man of the earth" (see Psalm 10:18) — the man of the earth as expressed in government, in all the various phases of his corrupt heart and unrestrained will.
The image dazzles and frightens at the same time. Both belong to one rule.
The times of the Gentiles are marked by the rule of man, in which there is much that calls forth the admiration of men by outward magnificence, and yet strikes terror by oppression. It is a vision of the man of earth in contrast to the God of heaven.
What stood before the king held everything a king values. It still robbed him of sleep.
There stood that image, its appearance frightening, holding such elements of wealth and power, such stores of gold and iron! How mighty, how unstoppable! No wonder the king was troubled, or that "his sleep left him" (Dan. 2:1).
Later chapters of Daniel take the empires apart one by one. Here the king sees something different: the whole course at once, standing in front of him.
He had seen the course of empire, not just in broken pieces one after another, but as a whole. In the later part of the book we get that succession marked out in more detail, with the ways the different powers acted towards Daniel's people. But here it is the general history of the Gentile empire.
The metals named next run from gold down to iron mixed with clay. That order carries meaning.
That is, the empires grew worse as they moved away from the source of power. It was God who gave imperial rule to Nebuchadnezzar. So what stands nearest to the source is seen as "this head of gold." In the Persian empire more of what was human comes in — "the breast and the arms of silver," a lesser metal. And so it goes on down to the legs of iron, and the feet, part iron and part clay.
The same empires appear elsewhere under a completely different picture. Set the two side by side, and you see whose eyes each one belongs to.
There was the likeness of a great image, majestic in size, made of the most costly, lasting, and useful metals. In it was everything that appeals to the world: the splendour and richness of gold and silver, the strength and usefulness of brass and iron. True, there was clay too, but it lay low down in the feet. By comparison, the beauty and brightness of the golden head and silver breast overshadowed it. Here is the world's estimate of imperial power and successful ambition, and people bow down and worship. But the same empires, shown in symbol to the saint, appear as unclean and terrifying beasts.
Because the figure is one, its fall is one. Nothing of the statue survives — not even the gold at the top.
Daniel 2 tells us an interesting and important fact: "the God of the heavens" acted by a dream on the first Gentile head of empire. The dream showed the whole course of the rule then beginning, down to its end — an image gorgeous and terrible, growing worse as it goes down, and closing with great strength and marked weakness together. Then He sets up another kingdom, His own. First He destroys the fourth empire in its last divided state of the ten toes, and with it the remains of all the rest from the first — the gold, the silver, the brass, as well as the iron and clay.
- One man. The four empires appear as one human figure — government in the hands of "the man of the earth," from Nebuchadnezzar to the kingdom of Christ.
- One glance. The king sees the whole course of empire at once, not a succession of details; those come later in the book.
- One descent. Gold to silver to brass to iron and clay: the further rule moves from the God who granted it, the more debased it becomes.
- Two views. Splendid metals to the world that bows to power; wild beasts when the saint sees the same empires in symbol.
- One end. God destroys the last divided empire of the ten toes, and every metal from the gold down goes with it — then He sets up His own kingdom in its place.
This image's head was of fine gold, its breast and its arms of silver, its belly and its thighs of brass,
Nebuchadnezzar's dream starts at the top with the most precious metal and works down. Why did God picture world history as a body of falling metals, and what does that say about power He gives to men?
The four empires are not four separate pictures. They form one figure — one man standing before the king.
We may first notice that the Gentile kingdoms are seen as one whole. The point is not their order in history, and not their moral character toward God and man. All the kingdoms together form one figure standing before God — the man of the earth as God sees him, splendid and terrible in the eyes of men.
Gold, silver and bronze are not weaker metals than iron. So the descent measures something other than muscle.
Another feature of the image is that it gets steadily worse from head to feet. The decline is not in the strength of the metals, but in their value. The strength of each metal shows how much land each empire ruled. The value of each metal shows the sovereign power of each empire. The last three world empires would rule far more land than the first. But in none of them was imperial power, which stands for the power of God, as clear as in the first empire — the head of gold.
The finest metal marks the empire that stood closest to the God who gave the authority.
The falling value of the metals showed a decline in the quality of the powers that followed. We may think it a hard saying, but rule by one supreme head is God's ideal in government. It will be seen in righteous yet kind perfection in the millennial reign of Christ. It is worth noting that in this chapter Daniel speaks more than once of "the God of heaven." This shows that this first Gentile ruler of supreme power held his authority as given to him from heaven. We believe this is the fact behind the Apostle's teaching in Romans 13:1.
The same fall shows distance from where power began:
There was a decline as the empires moved further from the source of power. It was God who gave imperial rule to Nebuchadnezzar. So the empire nearest the source is the one called "this head of gold."
The second empire is Medo-Persia. Its inferiority shows in how the ruler could act, not in how much land he held.
God showed Nebuchadnezzar the Medo-Persian power as a chest and arms of silver, and called it "inferior" to his own (Dan. 2:39). This inferiority was not in the size of its lands, but in the character of its rule. Nebuchadnezzar was an absolute monarch — "whom he would, he killed, and whom he would, he kept alive; whom he would, he raised up, and whom he would, he humbled" (Dan. 5:19). The power that followed was more limited in this, since the princes and others played an important part in the government. So Darius could not save an innocent man from the den of lions, though he badly wanted to.
The third section of the body points to the empire of Alexander the Great.
Alexander's kingdom is first spoken of as part of the great image Nebuchadnezzar saw in his dream. It is pictured by the belly and thighs of bronze. That marks a drop in the character of the kingdom compared with the empires of Babylon and of the Medes and Persians, though it covered more ground: it "shall rule over all the earth."
The vision does not stop with the metals. The last thing Nebuchadnezzar saw was not an empire at all.
Last of all in the vision, Nebuchadnezzar saw a stone cut out "by no human hand." He saw the coming of a Kingdom that man did not set up. We know this is the Kingdom of Christ. The stone falls on the feet of the image, but the whole image ends in ruin. The Kingdom of Christ will judge the final form of the last empire. In doing so it will set aside the whole system of government by the man of the earth, and set up a stable, world-wide government, like a great mountain that "filled the whole earth."
- One man. The four empires are one figure — the man of the earth, splendid to human eyes and terrifying at the same time.
- One gift. Nebuchadnezzar held his authority as a gift from the God of heaven. That is why the head is gold.
- One descent. Each metal is worth less than the one above it. That marks falling sovereign power, not shrinking size or strength.
- One pattern. Silver's king cannot do all he wants. Bronze rules more land yet stands lower still. The further from the source, the lower the rule falls.
- One end. The stone cut by no human hand does not repair the figure. It ends the whole system and fills the earth with the kingdom of Christ.
its legs of iron, its feet part of iron and part of clay.
The dream now moves down the great statue, past gold, silver and brass, to legs of iron and feet mixed with clay. Two questions follow. What empire do the iron legs stand for? And why does such a grand image end in common clay?
The metals get cheaper as the eye travels down, but they do not get weaker.
Another feature of the image is that its materials get worse from head to feet. This decline is not in the strength of the metals, but in their value. The strength of the metals shows how far the rule of each empire reached. The value of the metals shows the sovereign power of each empire.
The decline has a cause: distance from the One who gave the authority.
The empires declined as they moved away from the source of power. It was God who gave imperial rule to Nebuchadnezzar. So the part nearest that source is the head of gold. In the Persian empire there is a bit more of what is human: the chest and arms of silver, a lesser metal. And so on down to the legs of iron, and the feet, part iron and part clay. It is quite plain from this that the further we move from the original grant of power, the more debased the rule becomes.
Commentators read the four sections of the statue as four world powers in turn, ending with Rome. The direction of travel is downward, not upward.
The fourth great empire to rise during the times of the Gentiles, pictured by the two legs of iron, is the iron empire, Rome. Here, then, is history written in advance. God, who knows the end from the beginning, revealed in this dream the course of the times of the Gentiles... Notice how the make-up of this image gets worse: gold, silver, brass, iron, and at last less iron, with clay taking a leading place. It shows that in political terms the times of the Gentiles are not improving.
Iron fits what Rome did, and the dream follows that empire past its united days.
The Roman empire did break in pieces and conquer the civilized world, and it lasted as one united empire for centuries. Its unity broke up, as we know. Yet the dream still treats it as existing in some form until its last stage at the end of its story, when it appears as ten kingdoms and clay is mixed with the iron. The result is a kingdom partly strong and partly brittle.
Every other material in the statue is metal. Clay is not, and Scripture uses it in a particular way.
The mixture of clay and iron is a fitting symbol, for they are completely different in character. Iron is a metal, worth less than gold but stronger. Clay is not a metal, and Scripture uses it as a picture of what is human as against what is Divine: see Job 10:9 and Job 33:6, and the places where man is like clay in the hands of God, who is the Potter.
Commentators differ on what the clay stands for in history. Some see foreign peoples pressing into the empire:
That metal stands for the original Roman element in its strength. The clay was a foreign ingredient, and it brought in weakness when it tried to fuse with the iron.
Others read it as a way of ruling, not a group of people:
We see no reason to doubt a very common reading of the clay: it stands for popular, democratic forms mixed with absolute government. Absolute rule and the will of the people do not belong together. They can never be fully welded into one, and the very try at joining them becomes a source of weakness.
The blow that ends the statue lands exactly where this verse leaves off — and that placement settles what the smiting is.
This final blow does not fall on the head of gold, the silver chest, the belly and thighs of brass, nor even on the legs of iron. It falls on the feet of iron and clay. This alone proves that the striking of the image is not the arrival and slow spread of Christianity, as many have supposed. It is a blow struck by divine power while the fourth empire is in its divided and mixed state.
- Downward — the metals drop in value from head to feet. Each empire stands further from God, who first gave the rule to Nebuchadnezzar.
- Iron — the legs are Rome, the power that broke the civilized world in pieces. Rome loses none of the strength; it loses the value.
- Clay — the one non-metal in the statue, a picture of what is human. Commentators differ: some see foreign peoples, others see popular rule mixed with absolute rule.
- Brittle — iron and clay never truly bond, so the final form of the empire is partly strong and partly fragile.
- Powder — the stone strikes the feet, not the head. The end of Gentile rule comes by a direct act of God, not by slow improvement.
Thou sawest till a stone was cut out without hands; and it smote the image upon its feet of iron and clay, and broke them to pieces.
Nebuchadnezzar's dream reaches its turning point here. He watches a stone, shaped by no human hand, strike the huge statue at its weakest point and shatter it. Three questions follow: what is the stone, why does the blow land on the feet, and is this slow or sudden?
The phrase "without hands" rules out any human origin.
The stone fell on the feet of the image. The stone is described as "cut out without hands" — that is, with man having nothing to do with it — not human but divine in origin. In prophecy the Lord Jesus is first called the Stone in Genesis 49:24. There old Jacob, while blessing his sons, broke off to exclaim, "from there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel." He appears under this figure again in Isaiah 28:16, and on into the New Testament.
Where the stone lands settles the timing.
Destruction comes only when Gentile supremacy exists in its last form. This final blow falls not on the head of gold, the silver breast, the belly and thighs of brass, nor even on the legs of iron, but on the feet of iron and clay. This alone proves what the striking of the image is not. It is not the introduction and gradual spread of Christianity, as many have supposed. It is a blow that divine power inflicts when the fourth empire is in its divided and mixed state. It existed in full unity and power for centuries after Christianity began.
Each material in the feet stands for something:
From the iron we learn that there will be an imperial rule, while the clay points to ten separate kingdoms (Rev. 17:12-13). It is on the feet of the image that the stone falls... This event, still future, is the end of the "times of the Gentiles."
Many read the stone as the gospel slowly winning the world. One writer answers by asking what the stone does.
God's gospel is the revelation of Christ. The Spirit of God applies it to save sinners, Jews and Gentiles who believe. But the "little stone" stands for something else. It is a power, small in appearance, which at once destroys all that is high, great, and strong on the earth. Its first blow reduces the entire imperial system to powder. So trying to make the gospel out of it fails completely... It is plain that the "little stone" is not the gospel or the church, but the kingdom of God which Christ enforces when He returns.
The stone strikes before it spreads.
The instrument of this destruction was not formed by the wisdom or the schemes of man. It is "cut out without hands." It does not act by a moral influence that changes the character of the object it acts on. It destroys that object by force. It is God who establishes it and gives it that force. The stone does not gradually increase in size to displace the image. Before it spreads, it destroys the image. Note that God does not destroy the image in some other way and then set up the kingdom. The kingdom He is establishing strikes the feet of the image as its first act.
Daniel's interpretation speaks of a kingdom. In Matthew, the same figure points to a Person the builders refused.
He was the Stone, refused by the builders. The Lord Jesus went on to warn them, "The one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him" (Matt. 21:44). These last words are close to those we have considered in Daniel 2:34. While in Daniel the emphasis was on the kingdom, here in Matthew it is very clearly on the Person of Christ... If the Lord Jesus had come in power to free the nation from Roman rule, it might have been different. But His lowly character and meekness exposed their hypocrisy. That did not suit them, and so they stumbled.
Those who come to Him now know Him in another way:
We know Him as the "Living Stone," and we have already come to Him, as 1 Peter 2:5 reminds us. We are His already, and we share His nature as "living stones." So we are built up, under His authority, into that spiritual house and holy priesthood. He is the King of that coming kingdom predicted in Daniel 2. When He falls in judgment, it will be to demolish completely. While we wait for that, we know His attractive power, and its effect is to build up.
- Origin — "Cut out without hands" means the stone owes nothing to human wisdom or effort. Its origin is divine.
- Aim — The blow lands on the feet, not the head. That is the last stage of the fourth empire: imperial rule mixed with ten kingdoms.
- Method — This is a blow, not an influence. The stone does not transform the image; it shatters it.
- Order — Destruction comes first, growth second. The stone becomes a mountain only after the image is gone.
- Person — The Stone is Christ. The builders refused Him. He is a foundation to build on now, and a crushing weight in the day of judgment.
Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold broken in pieces together, and they became like the chaff of the summer threshing-floors; and the wind carried them away, and no place was found for them. And the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.
The stone is a kingdom which is not built up or formed by the wisdom of statesmen, or founded on victories won by military leaders. No mortal hand carves out its destiny or builds up its power; it is set up by the God of heaven. It is the introduction of Christ, according to Psalm 2, where God says, "As for me, I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill."
The contrast with the statue is deliberate. One is a manufactured object; the other is untouched material.
An image is something on which the hand of man has worked; the stone is untouched by the hand of man. It is a kingdom altogether different from everything that had gone before it.
There is a sense in which even literal Babylon, Persia and Greece still exist. Persia exists to this day. So does Greece. This, I believe, explains Daniel 2:35. The four kingdoms are included here as sharing a common doom.
No statement could show more clearly that the proper kingdom of Christ does not yet exist.
Crushing the image of Gentile empires to powder is in no way and at no time the church's work. The once rejected but now exalted Stone will do it, as He declared in Matthew 21:44 and in other scriptures.
Christians pray, with more or less understanding and warmth, "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come." When the stone moves against the image, that will be the answer to this prayer. Christ is the stone. But the rejected stone has been raised up. And "when it falls on anyone, it will crush him" (Matt. 21:44). No other word is needed to show us who and what the stone is.
- Cut — the stone is shaped by no human hand: not by statesmen, not by armies, but set up by the God of heaven.
- Falls — its first act is a blow, not an influence; the statue's character is never changed, only shattered.
- Scatters —
- Fills —
- Reigns —
This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation of it before the king.
Nebuchadnezzar woke from a dream he could not remember. He had sentenced all his advisers to death for failing to recover it. Daniel has just described the great image to the king. Now he turns from the dream to what it means.
The verse marks a turn inside Daniel's reply to the king. Before giving the meaning, he says where the revelation came from.
Daniel's answer comes in three parts. First, he explains where the revelation of the secret came from and why it was given. Second comes the dream itself. Last comes its interpretation. Daniel begins, in clear communion with the mind of God, by declaring that human wisdom is powerless... Daniel goes on to declare the source of the vision. "There is a God in heaven who reveals secrets," and this was Daniel's God, and he delighted to exalt Him in the presence of this absolute and idolatrous king.
Daniel promised the king an interpretation before God had given him one. Two things stand together here: certainty about God, and no claim for himself.
He does not wait until God gives him the answer before he says that he would show the interpretation of the dream. He offers it at once. He is confident in God, and that is faith — a conviction founded on the known character of God... We have two great things brought out in Daniel: first, his confidence that God would reveal the thing to the king; second, his confession that he could not.
Daniel stands alone before Nebuchadnezzar, yet he does not say "I". Three friends had prayed with him for this secret, and he keeps them in the sentence.
In verse 36 Daniel says, "This was the dream. Now we will tell the king its interpretation." He links his companions with himself before the king, just as he had already done before God in his thanksgiving. It is very lovely, and it says much about the unselfish humility and generous heart of this "man greatly beloved."
The interpretation begins with the king himself. Babylon stands first among the four kingdoms, and the reason lies in where its power came from.
Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom was a direct gift from God. As Daniel said, "You, O king, are a king of kings, for the God of heaven has given you a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory." No one could say that of the three kingdoms that followed. They come on the scene by God's providence. God permits them to govern the earth, and it happens according to His ordering. But their heads did not hold power directly from God, as Nebuchadnezzar did. He was nearest God in this outward sense, and his responsibility was therefore all the greater.
The meaning Daniel is about to give reaches past one king. Authority on earth has changed hands.
In Ezekiel chapter 1 the prophet had seen the glory of the Lord by the river Chebar. In chapter 11 he sees that glory leave Jerusalem. It departs from the house and from the city. It is a remarkable fact that the glory of the Lord has left its earthly throne. But more: at the same time this earthly power was transferred from Jerusalem to the Gentiles, and government entrusted to men. So we read in Daniel 2:36-38.
The empires Daniel begins to trace do not run on forever.
Babylon ruled for less than a century, then fell to the Medes and Persians. These in turn gave way to Alexander and his Macedonians. Later still, the Macedonians fell before the power of Rome... The next kingdom God sets up will be the kingdom of His Son. The fourth empire (Rome) will revive for a short period. Then God will bring the Lord Jesus once more on the scene, and He will take all the affairs of earth into His own blessed hands.
Daniel got the meaning of the dream from God alone. That shapes how anyone should read prophecy.
We need not go beyond Scripture to understand prophecy. It is the right, spiritual use of what is in the word of God. Take the simplest man who studies his Bible carefully in his own language and is led by the Spirit of God. He has the elements and the power of a true interpretation. But suppose a man hunts for an interpretation here and there, with the help of history, ancient records, newspapers and the rest. He is only deceiving himself and his hearers.
- Revealed — God alone brought the dream back and explained it, after human wisdom had failed.
- Shared — Daniel says "we", drawing his praying companions into the credit before the king as he had before God.
- Received — Nebuchadnezzar's rule was a direct gift from God. That is why he is the head of gold, and why his responsibility was greatest.
- Transferred — rule passes from Jerusalem to the nations, and God puts government into human hands.
- Replaced — the line of empires ends when God sets up the kingdom of His Son. Scripture alone, not outside sources, makes this plain.
Thou, O king, art a king of kings, unto whom the God of the heavens hath given the kingdom, the power, and the strength, and the glory;
This verse opens Daniel's explanation of the king's dream. Before he traces a single empire, he tells Nebuchadnezzar where the crown on his own head came from.
The name Daniel uses for God here is deliberate. God once ruled the earth from a throne in Jerusalem. That throne was set aside. Only then did He give authority to a foreign king under this new name.
It is as "the God of heaven" that God acts in giving power to the Gentiles. As "God of the earth" His throne was at Jerusalem, and will be when He again makes Himself known that way. But His throne on earth has been set aside, because those who held His authority and acted for Him had sinned. So He now acts as "God of heaven," giving authority to the Gentile king.
Nebuchadnezzar had conquered Jerusalem and overpowered Egypt. Daniel tells him none of it came from himself.
It was not a question of his own prowess, nor of any special wisdom he possessed. If Nebuchadnezzar had been allowed to carry away these captives, and to triumph over the power of Egypt, it was the God of heaven who had given it to him.
The phrase is not flattery. It names a form of rule that begins with this man: many nations and their own kings gathered under one head.
Daniel tells Nebuchadnezzar that, as the representative of the Babylonian empire, he is the head of gold. Until now the earth had separate nations, each under its own king. Now, for the first time, a new form of government begins — government by imperial unity. Under it, one empire joins nations and their kings under an imperial head who is a king of kings.
The title also points past Babylon. One writer sees in this king a small, flawed copy of a greater One.
The God of heaven gives Nebuchadnezzar the kingdoms of the earth. The Gentile kingdom soon widens into an empire such as Israel had never seen. Nebuchadnezzar is therefore a king of kings — a small image of Him who will be the "King of kings and Lord of lords," and something of an image too in the absolute authority he had. But there the resemblance ends. How different the character of the man who has this power, and how fast it decays!
One writer traces the whole decline to one thing: where each empire's authority came from.
Four imperial powers were to follow one another, and God set up Nebuchadnezzar himself as their great head. In certain respects they would grow steadily worse. To me, the special excellence of the head of gold is that it received its authority straight from God Himself. In fact the absolute authority of the first power rested on the gift of the God of heaven. The others came in by God's providence, and to them God was not the direct source of authority. Babylon was the authority God established.
That nearness carried a cost. Being closest to God in this outward sense made this king the most answerable of the four:
He was nearest God in this external sense, and his responsibility was therefore all the greater.
The gift did not keep the king humble. One writer sets his later pride against the words of this verse.
God had given to the king "a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory" (Dan. 2:37). Despite God's gifts, and the striking way in which He had borne witness to Himself, the king had forgotten Him. The king, at rest in his palace and at the height of his prosperity, credits all his power and glory to himself, and uses his high position to exalt himself. Never was such great prosperity linked with such pride.
The principle did not die with Babylon. What was true of the head of gold holds for every government since.
In this chapter Daniel speaks more than once of "the God of heaven." This shows that the first Gentile monarch of supreme power held his authority as something given to him from heaven. We believe this fact lies behind the teaching of the Apostle in Romans 13:1. The power in his own day was the fourth one, mentioned in our chapter. But the Gentile powers that exist, whoever they may be at any given moment, hold their authority as delegates of "the God of heaven."
- Given — God handed over the kingdom, power, strength and glory. Nebuchadnezzar's wins over Judah and Egypt proved nothing about the conqueror.
- From heaven — God set His throne in Jerusalem aside because of sin. Here He acts as "the God of heaven," not as God of the earth.
- Directly — Babylon alone received its authority straight from God. The later empires came in by providence, and each one stands further from the source.
- Answerable — the king nearest to God carried the greatest responsibility. He credited his glory to himself, and his pride grew with his prosperity.
- Still on loan — every government since holds power as a delegate of the same God, which is the ground of Romans 13:1.
and wheresoever the children of men, the beasts of the field, and the fowl of the heavens dwell, he hath given them into thy hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all thou art this head of gold.
Daniel turns from the dream to the dreamer, and tells the most powerful man alive where his power came from. The verse hands Nebuchadnezzar an empire over people, beasts and birds — and calls that whole reach a gift.
Nebuchadnezzar had beaten Egypt and carried Jerusalem's people away. Daniel credits none of it to the king's own ability.
It was not a question of his own strength, nor of any special wisdom he had. Egypt had wanted to dispute who ruled the world. If Nebuchadnezzar was allowed to carry away these captives, and to triumph over Egypt's power, it was the God of heaven who had given it to him... Clearly the Babylonian empire is meant.
The image drops in value from head to foot. That drop measures the power of each empire, not its size.
This deterioration is not in the strength of the metals, but in their value. The strength of each metal shows how much land each empire ruled. The value of each metal points instead to its sovereign power. The last three world empires would rule far more land than the first. But in none of them was the imperial power, which stands for the power of God, as clear as in the first empire — the head of gold.
What set Babylon apart was how the power arrived, and that nearness raised the stakes.
Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom was a direct gift from God... This could not be said of any of the three later kingdoms. They come on the scene through providence. God permits them to govern the earth, and they rise according to His ordering. But their rulers were in no sense direct holders of power, as Nebuchadnezzar was. He was nearest God in this outward sense, so his responsibility was all the greater.
Israel had never held power on this scale. The words "wherever they dwell" mark a reach no ruler has ever filled — not even the king who received it.
Such dominion as Nebuchadnezzar had was never given to Israel. Not even Solomon's kingdom was anything like the extent of empire that Nebuchadnezzar had... No Gentile has ever realised this enormous gift. The largest empire that ever submitted to the rule of one man never took in the fullness of the gift as declared to the Gentile king. Yet, as it was, it was a weight of glory and power he was unable to bear; he was, as it were, crushed under it. There is a Man coming, the Man of God's right hand, who is able and worthy to bear it.
The verse names people, beasts of the field and birds of the heavens. One group of creatures is left out.
In Daniel 2:38 we read that the birds of the heavens were likewise given into his hand. In Genesis 1:28 we learn that the fish of the sea were also to come under man. But the fish are not named as part of Nebuchadnezzar's dominion. When Psalm 8 speaks of the dominion of the Son of Man, however, it takes in all of these — and its language covers much more besides.
Daniel's words point to a man here, not to a kingdom.
Nebuchadnezzar was the head of gold: God had made him a king of kings, and the power and splendour of the kingdom centred in himself. Little is said of his kingdom; much is said of himself... The kingdom later comes into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar's son, and then into the hand of his grandson. Yet neither of them is the head of gold, and neither has any place in the vision.
So the question turns back on the king himself.
Man now gets another trial. Supreme power is put into his hand... How then will he use it? Will it be to the glory and honour of Him from whom he had received it? The result is known. Lifted up in pride of heart, he makes himself a centre. He persecutes God's people for the sake of a religious unity built on idols, apart from God... He loses his moral reason and becomes a beast!
- Given. The God of heaven gave Nebuchadnezzar his empire. No skill or conquest of his own won it.
- Gold. He is the most valuable metal because he stood nearest the source. He held power as a direct gift; the empires after him rose through providence.
- Wide. The gift covered people, beasts and birds wherever men live. No empire has ever filled it.
- Short. The fish of the sea are missing from his list. Full dominion over creation waits for the Son of Man.
- Weighed. Nearest to God meant greatest responsibility. The weight crushed him: he fell into pride and lost his reason. A Man is coming who is able and worthy to carry it.
And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee; then another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth.
Daniel has just called Nebuchadnezzar the head of gold. Now the interpretation moves down the statue, covering two more world empires in one sentence. Two questions follow: which kingdoms are meant, and how a bigger empire can still be called "inferior."
Daniel names no nation here. His own later visions supply them.
The verse mentions the second and third empires in the briefest way — the breast and arms of silver, and the belly and thighs of bronze. From later visions we learn that the second empire is the Medo-Persian (see Dan. 5:28 and Dan. 8:20) and the third empire the Grecian (see Dan. 8:21). Here we learn only that the kingdoms to come will be inferior to the empire of Babylon.
The word does not mean smaller or weaker. It measures how much power sat in one ruler's hands.
The Medo-Persian power was shown to Nebuchadnezzar as a breast and arms of silver, and pronounced "inferior" to his own (Dan. 2:39). This inferiority was not in extent of dominion, but in character of rule. Nebuchadnezzar was an absolute monarch — "whom he would, he killed, and whom he would, he kept alive; whom he would, he raised up, and whom he would, he humbled" (Dan. 5:19). The next power was more limited here, since the princes and others played an important part in the government. So Darius found himself unable to save an innocent man from the den of lions, though he badly wanted to. The next empire — the Grecian — was more military in character, and its generals had a strong influence over its ruler.
The metals lose value as the eye moves down the statue. Commentators read that fall in two ways. The first is distance from the source of the power.
There was deterioration, as the empires departed from the source of power. It was God who gave imperial rule to Nebuchadnezzar. So the empire nearest that source appears as "this head of gold." More of what is merely human comes in with the Persian empire — "the breast and the arms of silver," an inferior metal — and so on down. It is quite plain from this that, as we descend from the original grant of power, there is a gradual debasement.
The other reading takes the strength of the metals and their value as measuring two different things.
This deterioration is not in the strength of the metals, but in their value. The material strength of the metals sets out the extent of the dominions of each empire. The value of the metals signifies rather the sovereign power of each empire. The last three world empires would each stretch far wider than the first. But none of them showed the imperial power, which represents the power of God, as clearly as the first empire — the head of gold.
Greece reaches wider than the other two, and is still only bronze. The state of the empire itself explains why.
The Grecian Empire is called "a kingdom of bronze," as inferior to the Babylonian and the Persian: Dan. 2:39. It was not inferior in extent. Yet the verse says it "shall rule over all the earth"; but as an empire it was not consolidated, and hardly had any capital. An army had to be left in Greece under Antipater to keep the peace. When Alexander died the empire was not conquered by others, but fell to pieces of itself.
Greece was in no shape to rule anything when Daniel wrote this.
Who could have imagined an empire far wider than any before it, coming from the vain and quarrelsome Greeks, led by the despised Macedonians and their boy king? Up to that time, apart from Sparta, what were they but a cluster of jealous, divided states struggling for leadership? Only God could have led the king to dream, and the prophet to interpret, the Greek or Macedonian kingdom.
The verse gives centuries of history a single line.
There is but little said in this chapter of the second and third empires. The chapter highlights the truth about the first kingdom, which received its dominion directly from God, and about the fourth. In the last days of the fourth, the whole structure will be set aside, with not a trace remaining.
That brevity says something about what God values.
Persia's might may look great, and Greece's too. Their disputes may fill up the history of the world. Yet God thinks little of them. He disposes of the records of centuries in a few words.
- Downhill from gold. Each empire stands further from the rule God first gave Nebuchadnezzar. The falling metals record that gradual debasement.
- Inferior, not smaller. The second kingdom ranks lower in how it ruled, not in how much land it held. Its king was bound by his own princes.
- Wider, cheaper. Bronze rules over all the earth, yet still ranks below silver. Reach grew as real authority shrank.
- Named later. Daniel names no kingdom here. His later visions supply Medo-Persia and Greece.
- Skipped quickly. God disposes of centuries in a few words. He saves the detail for the first kingdom He gave and the last one He will set aside.