Daniel 2:41–44

While the image represents the times of the Gentiles, from Nebuchadnezzar's day until the establishment of the kingdom of Christ, it is yet one image, and that the image of a man. It is thus, as has been strikingly observed by another, a representation of "the man of the earth"... and the man of the earth, it may be added, as expressed in government — in all the various phases, as will afterwards be seen, of his corrupt heart and unbridled will.

A third feature is that the fourth empire in the course of its history, will become divided and weakened. Daniel tells us that "the feet and toes" were "partly of potter's clay and partly of iron." This shows that "it shall be a divided kingdom," and weakened — or, as Daniel says, "partly strong and partly brittle."

That power was known above all others for its strength in beating down everyone who rose up against it... yet that very power is described here like this: "And as you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter's clay and partly of iron, it shall be a divided kingdom." The Romans do not tell us this. History is not always a truthful speaker. Those who describe their own country's politics are usually not very trustworthy... but God tells it all out. So we find that the same empire, so famous for its amazing strength, would also show the deepest weakness inside itself.

The iron was the original material. The clay came in later, and did not really belong to the great metal statue. It was a foreign ingredient... I believe that in using the figure of clay, the Spirit of God does not point to the original Roman element, which had the strength of the iron. He points to the barbarian hordes that broke in later. They weakened the Roman power and step by step formed separate kingdoms. I can, however, only give this as my own judgment.

We see no reason to doubt a very common interpretation of the clay. It stands for the mixing of popular, democratic forms with absolute government — the joining of absolute rule with the popular will. These elements do not match, so they can never be welded together. The very attempt to unite them must become a source of weakness.

Now this is exactly what has happened to the once tightly united Roman empire. It has been "divided," but still "some of the firmness of iron" remains in it. In this sense the Roman empire still exists. It is no longer one undivided whole, but a set of broken pieces. Most of the strong nations of Europe are only broken portions of the old Roman empire. We believe that at the time of the end these fragments will come together again under a revived, or eighth, headship.

Before the age closes there will be a most remarkable union of two conditions that seem to contradict each other. There will be one head over the whole empire, and also separate independent kingdoms, each with its own king. That one man will be emperor over all these kings. Till that time comes, every effort to unite the different kingdoms under one head will be a total failure. Even then they will not be melted together into one kingdom... God has said they will be divided.

Note the expression, "in the days of these kings," especially as it follows verse 43. It gives us the fact... that the last kingdom of the four will be divided into ten kingdoms. It also marks the time when the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will displace — first destroy, and then displace — the last form of the Roman empire.

The Romans do not tell us this. History does not always tell the truth. Those who describe their own country's politics are seldom trustworthy. If something threatened to wipe them out, they were glad to hide it. They were just as ready to boast about anything that showed their boldness, strength and glory. But God tells it all. The same empire, so famous for its amazing strength, would also show the deepest weakness inside itself.

The first thing to note in this image is the falling value of the metals that stand for these kingdoms. It gives us God's estimate of the decreasing glory in the kingdoms of men. First we have the gold representing Babylon, the kingdom at its best as given to Nebuchadnezzar by God, v. 37. The silver represents the Medo-Persian. The brass represents the Grecian. The iron represents Rome past, and the iron and clay of the toes Rome future… Seven heads controlled the Roman empire in its original form, while ten horns or toes will control it in its future revival, Rev. 13:1.

We see no reason to doubt a very common interpretation of the clay. It stands for the mixing of popular, democratic forms with absolute government — the joining of absolute rule with the will of the people. These two elements do not belong together. They can never be fully welded into one, and the very effort to join them must become a source of weakness.

The iron was the original element. The clay came in later and did not really belong to the great metal statue. It was a foreign ingredient… I believe the Spirit of God, in using the figure of clay, does not point to the original Roman element, which had the strength of the iron. He points to the barbarian hordes that broke in at a later period. They weakened the Roman power and formed separate kingdoms step by step. I can, however, only state this as my own judgment.

Two facts become clear. First, the fourth empire will be divided and weakened by the mixture of clay. Yet it will always be true that some of the strength of the iron stays in it. It will never be pictured as clay alone. The government of the fourth empire will never be wholly democratic. Second, the iron and the clay may mingle, but they will never hold together. Democracy and sovereignty will always be opposed.

Authority that comes from God and authority that comes from man are as different as gold or iron is from clay. The two may be mingled. In our modern theory and practice of government they are partly mixed beyond untangling. But only weakness and brittleness result. Soon will come the death-blow delivered by the stone "cut out without hands."

This final blow falls not on the head of gold, the silver chest, the belly and thighs of brass, nor even on the legs of iron, but on the feet of iron and clay. This alone proves that the striking of the image is not the introduction and gradual spread of Christianity, as many have supposed, but a blow struck by divine power when the fourth empire is in its divided and mixed state. It existed in full unity and power for centuries after Christianity began.

The image in Daniel 2 has feet, "part of iron and part of clay." There is weakness as a result. That metal represents the original Roman element in its strength. The clay was a foreign ingredient, and it brought in weakness when it tried to combine with the iron. Later, swarms of invaders came down on the empire from the north and east, and it fell. Since then no hand has been able to gather up the broken pieces and put them firmly together again. Not that men did not want to; they have tried all sorts of methods — the sword, policy, intermarriage — but in vain.

The "they" of this passage seems to mean those who hold authority at the time. We have no hesitation in seeing here a prediction of the rise and spread of democracy in the last days. Authority that has its source in God and authority that has its source in man are as different as gold or iron or any other metal is from clay. The two may be mingled. In our modern theory and practice of government they are in part mixed together beyond separating. But this only produces weakness and brittleness, and soon the stone "cut out without hands" will deal the death-blow.

The mixture of iron and potter's clay changes the original character of the imperial Roman power. Something else enters it. The old character partly remains, but a new element is added. The energetic will of man is not there in an absolute way… There are two causes of weakness here — division, and the failure of the two elements to hold together… The "seed of men" is, I think, something outside of what marks the proper strength of the kingdom. But these two elements will never combine. It seems to me that this probably points to the barbarian or Germanic element, added to what originally made up the Roman empire.

The loss of what is of God and the introduction of the human element lead, as always, to division and weakness. The weakened governing power can no longer hold the empire together. The iron mixed with the soft clay shows the mingling of democracy with sovereignty. The clay, or democratic element, brings about the break-up of the empire.

Two facts, however, become clear. First, the mixture of clay will divide and weaken the fourth empire. Yet it will always be true that some of the strength of the iron stays in it. No time will ever come when it can be likened wholly to clay. The government of the fourth empire will never be entirely democratic. Second, the iron and the clay may mingle, yet they will never hold together. Democracy and sovereignty will always be opposed to each other.

Before the age closes there will be a most remarkable union of two conditions that seem to contradict each other. There will be a universal head of empire, and separate independent kingdoms as well, each with its own king. That one man will be emperor over all these kings. Until that time comes, every effort to unite the different kingdoms under one head will fail completely. Even then, no one will fuse them into a single kingdom. Each independent kingdom will have its own king, though all are under one head. God has said they shall be divided.

Nebuchadnezzar's image, though it had a head of gold, had feet of clay. The strongest man stands on feet of clay, and must crumble away in time; death will come at last.

Mark those words, "in the days of these kings." They are a complete answer to those who have tried to make this the birth of Christ. They call that moment the start of the kingdom of grace. At the time here spoken of, the empire is broken up and divided. Was that the case when the Lord was born? Nothing of the sort. Rome was then at its fullest power. There was not the smallest crack anywhere in the empire. There was only one ruler, and only one will in control... What then does the verse refer to? I believe it points to the closing scene of the Roman Empire: not to the time when Christ was born, but to when the Lord Jesus comes with divine power to judge. No doubt He is the stone; but this is a destructive stone, wiping out the kingdoms of the earth.

I differ from Mr. Myers in referring "these kings" (not to the four kingdoms, but) to the toes of the great image, that is, to the ten rulers of the revived Roman empire in the last days, existing at the same time, whose judgment makes way for the universal prevalence of God's kingdom, which Christ in person shall administer.

I am well aware that many expounders of the Word of God have tried to make out that this is the Gospel. I do not see how they make it out at all. I do not think the Gospel is very destructive, as this falling stone certainly is. And I ask you this: Did the Gospel ever smite the image? Never — the image smote Christ. It was the Roman power that killed the Lord Jesus. The Gospel has never set aside the civil power in this world. On the contrary, the Gospel has always suffered, and it will suffer right on to the end.

The little stone cut out without hands does not become a mountain until it has judged, broken in pieces and destroyed the image. And note: striking the image and then filling the whole earth is not the setting up of Christ's kingdom on the day of Pentecost. It is not an influence that changes the gold, the silver and the rest into the character of the stone. It is the sudden execution of judgment on the image — a blow that breaks it in pieces and leaves no trace of it behind.

The effort to find gradual and successive steps in Dan. 2:44, Dan. 7:26, and 2 Thess. 2:8 is unworthy of sound scholarship, and contradicts the plain object of the three texts, which describe nothing else or less than a sudden and complete extinction. Consuming in a slow way and by evangelical means is ruled out by the least approach to exact criticism, as well as by spiritual judgment.

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 in that way. But His earthly throne has been set aside. Those who were responsible for holding and administering His authority acted wickedly. So He now acts as "God of heaven," giving authority to the Gentile monarch.

This kingdom set up from heaven is the kingdom of Christ (see Daniel 7:1-14). Its first act will be to break the "image" in pieces. Then, when Christ Himself formally establishes it in power, it will grow until it fills the whole earth. It will have no successor, for it will stand for ever.

The description of it as "a great mountain" suggests its permanence and stability... Sin has ravaged the world for centuries, and man has tried to dethrone God. In that same world there will be righteousness, peace and gladness.

Christians are called to live apart from the world, to suffer, to stay separate and to submit, like the crucified Lord here below. Now if Daniel 2:44 is wrongly applied to a kingdom already set up, the church has to subdue and destroy the imperial powers... Through that error the church becomes a rebel in Christ's name, instead of a holy sufferer, as Christ and His servants taught and practised.