The Ancient of Days

Daniel 7:4-28

And four great beasts came up from the sea.

The Four Beasts

I. THE ELEMENT OUT OF WHICH THE WORLD-KINGDOMS CAME INTO EXISTENCE. “Four beasts came up from the sea.” The sea, when looked at in some of its aspects, is a most fit symbol of the means by which human kingdoms without godliness have made progress in the world.

1. There is the element of treachery. The sea is at one moment calm, and apparently harmless; and the next, sending a nation into mourning by overwhelming her vessels and casting their crews into the depths of the ocean.
2. The element of restless change. From its creation to the present moment its waters have not been at rest for a single hour.
3. The element of destructiveness. The sea is a terribly destroying power. The Babylonian, Persian, Macedonian, and Roman empires were destructive rather than constructive forces in the world.
II. THE CREATURES WHICH ARE USED AS SYMBOLS OF THE WORLD KINGDOMS. “Four beasts.” The characteristics of these kingdoms were animal rather than human. There is no true humanity where there is no divinity. These kingdoms of the parabolic vision are symbolised by beasts of prey noted for their strength, and cruelty, and treachery; no animal of a gentle, peaceful nature is found among them; denoting the entire absence of these characteristics in kingdoms without godliness.
III. THE KINGDOM THAT AROSE LAST OUT OF THE SEA OF TIME, EXCEEDED THOSE THAT HAD GONE BEFORE IT IN CRUELTY AND POWER. No mere animal could set forth all its destructive power; it had “iron teeth” and “ten horns.” The longer wickedness goes on unchecked the more its evil tendencies develops themselves, and the more it spreads desolation in the world.
IV. A TRULY HUMAN KINGDOM CANNOT ARISE OUT OF ANY ELEMENT OF EARTH, IT MUST COME FROM ABOVE. “The Son of man came with the clouds of heaven.” The head of every kingdom except Christ’s Kingdom has been a mere man. But the Son of man was from above, and He came to be the head of a kingdom of true humanity. The subjects of His Kingdom become partakers of the Divine natural, and, therefore, this kingdom exhibits none of the characteristics set forth by the beasts. It is a human kingdom because it is a Divine kingdom. Therefore, it is an everlasting kingdom. This vision teaches us:
1. The knowledge of the eternal in relation to human affairs in the ages to come.
2. That God has stretched a measuring line across the bounds of every kingdom. He has appointed the bound of their habitation.
3. Human kingdoms form a dark background to reveal the beauties of the Kingdom of Christ. (Outlines by London Minister.)


The Symbolical Beasts

Let us first attend to the place from which these beasts seemed to issue. It appeared to the prophet that they came up from the sea. We are not to interpret this literally. The sea, here, represents or symbolises something else, and, in a subsequent verse, we are told that it signifies the earth. “These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.” Now the word earth is often to be understood, not of this material globe, but of its inhabitants, as in that passage of Jeremiah, “O earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord.” And that in Psalms, “Make a joyful noise unto the Lord all the earth; make a loud noise, and rejoice and sing praise.” In this passage it is also to be understood of the inhabitants of the earth, or human society. When, therefore, these kings are said to rise out of the earth, this signifies that they would rise up out of the social state. But these beasts did not simply come out of the sea, when they rose out of it the sea was in a very marked condition. The four winds were striving upon it. Since the sea is the emblem of society, the sea, with the four winds striving thereon, is to be understood of society in a state of very great and violent commotion. Now, whereas the sea is represented as being in this state, when the several beasts came out of it, this clearly intimates that these kingdoms would arise amid great commotions, and that, compared with what was to follow, society might be said to continue in this state, and the earth to have no rest, until this extensive prophecy was fulfilled. In particular, we find the great empires, here predicted, rising to ascendancy amid the hurricanes of civil commotion, and convulsing the world by the shock of their fall. The four beasts which came up out of the sea signified four kings. “These four beasts are four kings that shall arise out of the earth.” In this passage the word king is of equal significance with the word kingdom. This is evident from verse 22, “The fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms.” Here the fourth beast is called the fourth kingdom, which undoubtedly implies that the three preceding beasts were three kingdoms. Whereas these kingdoms are symbolised by beasts, this was probably intended to describe the qualities by which they would be distinguished. It seems to intimate that all these governments, as to their principles and aims, who would be more characterised by what was common to man with the inferior creation than by those principles which connect, and ally, and link him to creatures holding a higher place in the ascending scale of existence. They are not simply represented by beasts, but by beasts of prey, by the lion, and the bear, and the leopard, and another beast which was dreadful, and terrible, and strong exceedingly. Now beasts of prey are principally distinguished from ethers by two things, they are strong and fierce, they take by violence and use with cruelty. And do not these symbols prove their own divinity? For what has been the character of all the great monarchies since the time of Daniel, as developed in their public character? May not a great part of their history be summed up in this, that they were strong and fierce, that they acquired dominion by violence, and used it in oppression? When brought to the test have not all governments accounted might to be right? Have not nations, up to this date, been known to one another principally as military establishments? Is not the history of empires a history of wars, murders, rapine, and desolation? If there be any variation in these murderous annals, it is when force gives place to policy and intrigue; it is, however, the wild beast still, though crouching in concealment, in order that he may spring unexpectedly upon his unprepared victim. Violence and fraud have been characteristic of every government that has risen hitherto upon the earth, even when individual rulers were personally of good character, and arts, commerce, and science were encouraged. There never was an instance of a government acting steadily on the great principles of truth and holiness. These beasts were four in number, and represented four kingdoms that were to arise upon the earth. That these were the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires is evident from a variety of considerations. In the first place, the symbols, here employed, will be found inapplicable to any other connected chain of history. An individual king may be found to whom some of the symbols apply, but a succession of four monarchies rising after one another will nowhere be found to which these words can with any plausibility be referred. In the second place, the application of the symbols to these four empires is so easy and natural as to show that the former were designedly employed to represent the latter. In the third place, this will appear from a comparison of the seventh with the second chapter of Daniel. These two chapters evidently refer to the same subject. Four kingdoms are symbolised in the second chapter, four kingdoms are symbolised in the seventh. In both chapters these kingdoms are represented as extending down to the period when God would erect His kingdom on the earth. In the second chapter the fourth kingdom is represented as being one of irresistible strength. In the seventh chapter it is described as being dreadful, and terrible, and strong exceedingly. The fourth kingdom, in the second chapter, is represented in its latter stages by ten toes. In the seventh chapter its last form is symbolised by ten horns. There cannot remain, on any mind capable of weighing evidence, the faintest doubt that the second and the seventh chapters relate to the same subject. This being ascertained, it is easy to prove, from the second chapter, that the four kingdoms must be understood of the Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman empires. In the second chapter the head of gold denoted the first monarchy; but Daniel said unto Nebuchadnezzar, “Thou art this head of gold”; the Babylonian empire was, therefore, the first of these kingdoms. Now, in the second chapter, the four empires are symbolised by one image. They must, therefore, have come after one another in the order of immediate succession. The other three kingdoms, then, must signify the three great empires which immediately succeeded that of Babylon. But it is matter of undeniable and immutable fact that the empire of Babylon was succeeded by those of Persia, Greece, and Rome; the Babylonian having been overthrown by the Persian, the Persian being overthrown by the Grecian, and the Grecian being overthrown by the Roman. Notwithstanding of certain minor exceptions that have been stated against it, we regard this theory as one at which we have arrived by the sound and simple exposition of the sacred text itself, and which has been tested by time and proved to be genuine. But while the fate of empires is concealed from man, it is naked and open to the eyes of God. Kingdoms rise and fall by Divine ordination: “Surely their days are determined, the number of their months is with God, he hath appointed them a bound which they cannot pass.” And, from the book of His immutable decrees, it is easy for Him to transcribe any page of the future with as much exactness as the historian can describe transactions that are past. But why, it may be asked, are only these four empires pointed out the prophecy? Why does the Holy Seer confine His revelations to this limited district of the world? Beyond it were myriads of the human race, and old and mighty dynasties, were then existing, elsewhere, or were afterwards to arise. Why in this symbolical representation of empire are not India and China included? Why are the two great continents of Africa and America wholly omitted? For this limitation we may venture to assign two reasons, not indeed drawn by exposition from the Scriptures, but drawn by exposition from the oracles of Providence. From what we see of His actual doings by means of these empires, we are perfectly safe in asserting that they occupy the sole place in these predictions on two accounts:
1. Because they were to exercise the greatest influence upon the church during the period to which this prophecy refers.
2. Because through them God intended to civilize and Christianize the whole earth. It is a fact which will not be denied that these empires have had the principal effect upon the church for good or for evil In the days of Daniel, the church existed only within the limits of the Chaldean empire. Afterwards, we find it within the Persian empire. Then we find it principally connected with the Grecian monarchy, favoured by the great Alexander, and persecuted by more than one of his successors. In the latter days of the Jewish dispensation, we find the Old Testament church connected with the empire of Rome. It was by Rome that Jerusalem was destroyed, and the Jews driven into exile. The place of their dispersion, and the scone of their sufferings, during a period of nearly eighteen centuries, has been almost exclusively within the limits of the four prophetic monarchies. Within this district the Son of God became incarnate and was crucified. Here the fires of persecution blazed most fiercely against His devoted witnesses. Here the great apostacy from the truth was generated. This district was the battlefield between Christ and anti-Christ during many generations. It is the centre still of all the contests between light and darkness, between God and Satan. It is thus a fact that these four empires have had most effect upon the church for good or for evil; and, therefore, we seem warranted in concluding that they alone are mentioned in these predictions, because of the influential connection in which they were to stand to the church. And it is not less true that these four empires have had the principal effect in the Christianization and civilization of the other districts of the world. Beyond the limits of these monarchies, the four winds have striven on the great sea. There have been wars, and changes, and conquests, but, unless we greatly mistake the matter, there is a very marked difference between the political commotions and changes which took place within the territorial limits of the four empires and those which occurred elsewhere. Beyond this district, we will see one great conqueror after another sweeping over the earth in the same murderous career. But we see no permanent current of civilization following these commotions. We see no advancement amid all these changes. We see the nations living in the same barbarous, or semicivilized, condition in which they were in the times of Daniel. But the commotions which have occurred within the limits of the four monarchies have had a civilizing tendency in the issue. Not to ascend higher, wherever the Romans carried their arms, they carried their noble literature, and left a seed of it behind. Their later conquests were preparatory to the dissemination of the gospel; and to the fourth empire, as the Divine instrument, may be traced the whole of European civilization. Look beyond the limits of these four empires, and wherever we see civilization it will be found to have come from them. Civilization and religion went from them to America, to Greenland, Australia, the isles of the Pacific, and to many spots in Africa. And there can now be little doubt that by means of the fourth empire, in its last form, and of the church within it, God intended to originate those movements which shall result in the Christianization of the world. How thankful should we be unto God that we have been born within the limits of these four monarchies, not merely because the currents of civilization flow there, but because of the streams of life by which they are watered and fertilized. How great and glorious does God appear in connection with this prophecy! How low should we lie in the dust before Him, under a profound feeling of the nothingness of our intellects, when we see His omniscient eye piercing the vista of ages and generations, and unfolding the end from the beginning! When we survey the long and dreary domination of the four predicted beasts, we are apt to be seized with a feeling of despondency. Why has wickedness been permitted to exult so long? But when we remember that the Lord reigneth, and that the past stages of the world are merely preparatory to its future glory, a prospect opens on our view delightful beyond all description. If rays of the Divine glory are seen sparkling out amid the eras that are past, we are prepared for the announcement that, when the work is completed, “the glory of the Lord will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea.” (W. White.)


Vision, of Four Wild Beasts
The first of these is the Babylonian empire. In the dream of Nebuchadnezzar its symbol was the head of gold, and in the dream of Daniel, the first wild beast which was like a lion and had eagle’s wings. The superior excellence of the head of gold to the silver, brass, and iron of the colossal image corresponds with the superior excellence of the first wild beast, which had the body of the king of beasts and the wings of the king of birds, to the three other wild beasts which came up afterwards out of the sea. A royal dignity belonged to the Babylonian empire which was lacking in its successors. It is true that when Daniel had his dream the Babylonian empire was near its end; but as the stand-point of Daniel in the dream was before the wild beasts came up out of the sea, the interpreter justly spoke of then to Daniel as “four kings which shall arise out of the earth.” In the dream the Babylonian empire was yet to come; but in point of fact it had already come, and was on the eve of passing away. In the plucking of the wild beast’s wings, which deprived it of its soaring ambition, and in lifting it up from the earth and giving to it a man’s attitude and heart, which deprived it of the voracious nature of the wild beasts, there seems to be a reference to the madness and restoration of Nebuchadnezzar. The Judgment which humbled and ennobled the great king, paved the way for the overthrow of the first great world-power. The empire after the restoration of Nebuchadnezzar had never been so glorious; but the change wrought in him had deprived it of the conquering and destructive power of the wild beast. The lion-like ferocity and eagle-like swiftness in pouncing upon the nations had given place to the kindliness and consideration of a brother man. And when the great king died the glory had departed. None of his successors had either his genius or his strength and nobility of spirit; and in twenty-three years the Babylonian empire had ceased to be. The second world-empire is the Medo-Persian. Three reasons seem to place this opinion, which has been common in all ages, on a solid and immovable foundation.
(1) It is historically true. It is admitted on all hands that the empire which succeeded the Babylonian was the Medo-Persian. To suppose, as the higher critics generally do, that the kingdom meant in both dreams is a kingdom of the Medes, is to ascribe to them a grave historical blunder, since the kingdom of the Medes lost its separate existence and became a part of the dominion of Cyrus eleven years before the downfall of the Babylonian empire.
(2) It is the empire meant in the sacred narrative. This seems clear from the following facts. In his interpretation of the mysterious writing which portended the doom of Babylon, Daniel says of one of the words which suggested the Persians: “Perez: thy kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians” (v. 28). It is no doubt true that Darius the Mede is mentioned as the first king; but then it is to be noted, not only that Darius the Mede “received the kingdom,” but that he and his councillors regarded the edict as unalterable, “according to the law, of the Medes and Persians” Dan_6:8; Dan_6:12; Dan_6:15).
(3) It is the only empire which fits the symbols. The symbol of the second empire in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream is “the breast and arms of silver.” The symbol is emblematic of its inferiority to the first empire, represented by the head of gold, and the two arms are the two people who composed it. Its symbol in Daniel’s dream is the second wild beast, “like to a bear, raised upon one side, with three ribs between its teeth, to which it was said, Arise, devour much flesh.” The Medo-Persian empire, like the bear, was powerful and destructive; one of its two people, the Persians, like one of the sides of the bear, was more prominent than the other; it had in its grasp, like the bear with the three ribs in its mouth, the three kingdoms of Babylon, Lydia, and Egypt; and it was sluggish, like the bear, and needed to be stimulated in its destructive voracity. The Medo-Persian empire fits exactly both symbols, while the empire of the Medes fits neither. On these three grounds it seems certain that the second empire symbolised in the two dreams was the Mede-Persian. The third world-empire is the Greek or Macedonian. Its symbol in the dream of Nebuchadnezzar is “the belly and thighs of brass”; in the dream of Daniel, a leopard with four heads and four wings. The leopard is a fierce animal, remarkable for its swiftness and agility. When the prophet wished to impress his fellow-countrymen with the exceeding swiftness of the horses of the Chaldeans, he described them as “swifter than leopards” (Hab_1:8). This quality of swiftness is here intensified by the leopard “having the four wings of a bird.” The lion, the symbol of the Babylonian empire, had only two wings; but the leopard, the symbol of the Macedonian, had four. The exceeding swiftness of such a wild beast is an emblem of Alexander the Great in his conquering career. The rapidity of his military movements was not only superior to those of Nebuchadnezzar and of Cyrus, but perhaps unexampled in the history of the world. The four heads of the leopard represent the four kingdoms into which the Macedonian empire was divided after Alexander’s death. The third wild beast seems in every, respect an apt symbol of the Macedonian empire. The higher critics generally, on the other hand, take the third wild beast to be a symbol of the Persian empire. I have already given three reasons for thinking that the second wild beast must be intended for the Medo-Persian empire. After the Babylonian empire there was neither a Median nor a Persian empire, but only a Medo-Persian empire; and if the second wild beast refers to the Medo-Persian empire, then the third wild beast must refer to the Macedonian empire, which immediately came, after it. But in addition, the third wild beast is not an apt symbol of the Medo-Persian empire. The four-winged leopard might be looked upon as a fit symbol of Cyrus, though not nearly so apt as a symbol of Alexander the Great, either for rapidity or ferocity; but it is altogether inappropriate to the general character of the Medo-Persian empire. Instead of being like a four-winged leopard, it strikingly resembled the awkward, slow-moving bear. Again, the four heads are not satisfactorily explained of the Medo-Persian empire by supposing that they refer either to its universal dominion—the four heads being understood as the four points of the compasstowards which the empire spread—or to four of its rulers. The heads naturally suggest kings or kingdoms, and the four heads being on the beast at one and the same time suggest four contemporaneous, and not four successive kings. The fourth world-empire is the Roman. The fourth wild beast, as it appeared to Daniel in the dream, is said to be “terrible and powerful, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with its feet: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.” There are two striking points of resemblance between this symbol and that of the fourth empire in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. One is, that both have iron as a characteristic feature. The fourth wild beast had great iron teeth, and the fourth or lowest part of the colossal image was iron; and as iron was an emblem of a breaking and subduing power, it strikingly shadows forth the Roman empire. The other is, that both were marked by the number ten. The fourth beast had “ten horns,” and the iron portion of the image “ten toes.” The ten horns and the ten toes represent the ten kingdoms into which the Roman empire would be divided; and here, as elsewhere in Scripture, the definite number ten seems to be used in an indefinite sense for a great many. But while an apt symbol for the divided Roman empire, the number ten seems totally inapplicable to the Grecian empire, which is the favourite view of the higher critics. We come now to what is said about the Little Horn. “I considered,” says Daniel, “the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another horn, a little one, before which three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots; and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things.” He says also in the 21 and 22nd verses: “I beheld, and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; until the ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.” The general opinion of the higher critics is that the little horn is a symbol for Antiochus Epiphanes, one of the Grecian kings of Syria (175 B.C-164 B.C.), and the arch-persecutor of the Jewish people. But this empire cannot be correct if, as we have already tried to show, the fourth world-empire is the Roman. Ahtiochus Epiphanes belongs to the third world-empire, and not to the fourth. Besides, there are two things in the symbol which show that it could not refer to Antiochus Epiphanes. One is, that the little horn canto up after the ten horns, and was distinct from them. Antiochus, on the other hand, was one of the ordinary kings of Syria. His kingship was not distinct from those of the divided empire. The other is, that the little horn rooted out three of the ten. There is nothing corresponding, or approaching to, this in the history of Antiochus Epiphanes. The little horn means, I have no doubt, Papal Rome. In the fifth century of our era the Roman empire was broken up by the invasion of northern hordes; and amongst the kingdoms into which it was divided the church in Rome, with its bishop, sprang into existence as one of the kingdoms of the empire. This took place in 755 A.D., when Pepin, king of the Franks, granted to the Pope for a temporal dominion the Ex-archate of Ravenna, the Pentapolis, and the Duchy of Rome; and so, according to the prophetic dream, the new kingdom came up after the other ten. It was also a little horn, whether you look at the church in Rome as an ecclesiastical body or at the temporal dominion with which it was invested. The States of the Church, even with the Dukedom of Spoleto, which Charlemagne added in 774 A.D., formed only the central part of the Italian peninsula. In 1870 these States were lost to the Church of Rome, and in 1871 formally annexed to the kingdom of Italy, while the Italian parliament agreed to allow the Pope to live in the Vatican as a sovereign, not subject to the laws of the land, and to grant him an annual appanage of nearly three and a quarter million of lires. So far, then, as temporal dominion is concerned, the Pope has always been a little horn. Again, Papal Rome, like the little horn, is diverse from the other horns of the empire, inasmuch as the spiritual power is combined with the temporal, the ecclesiastical with the political. Another thing noted of the little horn is, that “before it three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots.” This also is true of Papal Rome. Of the various opinions as to what the three extinguished sovereignties were, I am inclined to adopt that of Sir Isaac Newton, that they were the kingdom of the Lombards, the Ex-archate of Ravenna which represented the dominion of the Byzantine emperors, and the Duchy of Rome. Gibbon, in the forty-fifth chapter of his great work, says: “during a period of two hundred years, Italy was unequally divided between the kingdom of the Lombards and the Ex-archate of Ravenna.” And there can be no doubt that it was the Pope, by means of Pepin and Charlemagne, who put down these two sovereignties in the empire. The Duchy of Rome, which he also plucked up by the roots, though small in size, was yet, on account of its prominence and importance in the empire, well entitled to be represented as one of the ten horns. And it is a memorable and suggestive fact that the Pope, alone of all sovereigns, wears a triple crown. Again, Daniel says of the little horn: “Behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.” The eye is the symbol of intelligence, and the eyes of a man in the little horn imply that it would be distinguished amongst the kingdoms of the world for its subtle and astute diplomacy. Its intelligence would be that of a man as compared with that of a wild beast. And such extraordinary intelligence has been a distinguishing feature in the worldly policy of Papal Rome. Its diplomacy is unrivalled for duplicity and craft. And no worldly power ever approached it for speaking great swelling words of vanity. This is what is said to the Pope at his coronation: “Receive the tiara ornamented by the three crowns, and know that you are the father of bishops and kings, the earthly governor of the world, the vicar of our Saviour Jesus Christ to whom be honour, world without end.” Another feature of the little horn, which belongs also to Papal Rome, is its persecution of the people of God. “I beheld,” says Daniel (v. 21), “and the same horn made war with the saints, and prevailed against them.” In interpreting this, the angel said to Daniel (v. 25): “And he shall speak words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High; and he shall think to change the times and the law; and they shall be given into his hand until a time, and times, and half a time.” There is no need to enlarge upon the persecutions of the Papacy, as there is no land in Christendom whose soil has not been stained with the blood of the martyrs which she has shed. Happily its power to persecute is for the present, at least to a large extent, taken away. The next thing in the dream is the doom which was to befall the little horn. First of all, there is the sitting of the Heavenly court on the conduct of the little horn (v. 9, 10). There are judgment days in Heaven continually occurring with regard to human affairs. After the destruction of the little horn, the world-wide empire of the Messiah begins. Daniel thus continues his dream (v. 13, 14). (T.Kirk.)


The Vision of the Four Beasts
Let us attempt to get at the practical and permanent principles which underlie this remarkable prophecy, and which are at once profoundly suggestive and exceedingly important.
1. The terribly significant truth, that earthly power, in and of itself, degenerates into brutality. The appropriate symbol of a great empire is a wild beast. The kingdoms of the earth have stood on military conquest. Might has taken the place of right. The sword has been the arbiter of imperial dynasties, and the struggles between rival powers have been as fierce and destructive as the contentions of wild animals in the jungle.
2. The tendency of this brutality is to increase. Note the order in which the four beasts are set. Bad as the Babylonians were, they were outdone by the Persians; these were exceeded by the Greeks; while the Romans were the worst of all. Note that all this while the nations were growing in what has been called culture and civisation. This was a merely superficial thing, and served only to veneer the rottenness and cruelty which were beneath.
3. The restoration of man to humanity must come, not from himself, but from above. He who introduced the healing salt which is yet to purify thoroughly the bitter fountain of our earthly life was sent forth from “the ancient of days.” There are few more striking arguments for the Divine origin of the Gospel, and the deity of its author, than that which may be drawn from the contrast between the character of Jesus and that of His age. Surely, the hope of the world lies in the diffusion of the Gospel of Christ. Wherever the Gospel goes in power, it restores men to humanity by bringing them back to God. Civilisation without the Gospel is only a veneered brutality. (William M. Taylor, D.D.)


Daniel’s First Vision

This first vision of Daniel is confessed on all hands to be an expansion of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar’s dream had represented human empire in its intelligent, well-proportioned might. It was man’s power as formed, in some measure, in the image of God. The substance, the strength, the character of the several empires were different; the form was one. Daniel’s vision exhibits them on another side. The four winds of Heaven are driving upon the great sea, that representative, throughout Holy Scripture, of our troubled world, and out of it there arise forms of more than human strength. The terrific and wasting power of the world-empires is exhibited under the symbol of brute force. A sort of unity is given to them, in that they are all exhibited at first to the prophet’s eye at once. God shows them to him first, as He Himself sees all things, at once; then, as they arose in fact, succeeding one another. Nor did they arise of their own power. “Not without being acted upon by the winds of Heaven does the sea send forth those beasts; not without being set in motion by the powers above, does the heathen world form itself into those great empires” (Hoffmann.) As the Babylonian empire had been exhibited to Nebuchadnezzar under the symbol of the richest metal, “gold,” so now to Daniel under that of the solid strength of the king of beasts of prey, with the swiftness of the royal bird, the eagle. Jeremiah and Ezekiel had likened Nebuchadnezzar to both. The second beast, the bear, corresponds with the solid, heavy, chest of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. The twofold division and the relative strength of the two sides recur in this symbol also. It lifts itself heavily, in contrast to the winged rapidity of the Chaldean conquests. The “three ribs in its mouth” correspond accurately to the three kingdoms which the Medo-Persian empire swallowed up, the Lydian, Babylonian, and Egyptian. It is bidden, “Arise devour much flesh,” in conformity with the greedy character of the animal: waste of human life was a characteristic of the Persian empire in its heavy aggressiveness. Heaviness was, after Cyrus, the characteristic of its wars. Of the third empire, the characteristics are insatiableness of conquest, and swiftness, and fourfold division. The panther, an animal insatiable above every other beast of prey, gifted with a swiftness which scarce any prey can escape, is represented yet further with four wings. The subdivision of the empire is indicated by its four heads. Its colour corresponds to the brass of the image, its swiftness to the activity of the loins and thighs of the image. Probably the multiplication of the heads was a symbol of circumspection, of manifold, versatile intelligence. But, again, the chief object of interest in the vision is the fourth empire. For the living creature which can represent it there is no name. “In the former beasts,” says Jerome, “there are single tokens of terribleness, in this, there are all.” Of this last empire Daniel sees not only certain characteristics, but a history. Intervals of its history are marked. It embraces a long period. Its characteristic is stupendous strength. Permanent subdual characterised the Roman empire, but it had not the power of consolidating into one the disjointed materials of its greatness. The period after the destruction of the whole fourth kingdom is indicated by the words: “And the rest of the beasts, the other kingdoms, had their dominion taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time” (v. 12). This sentence seems to relate to a time after the destruction of the fourth empire, but this, being still future, we cannot explain certainly. The chief object of interest, that chiefly expanded, is that in which all the kingdoms end—the Kingdom of God victorious over the evil of the world . . . It is a sublime picture; man, with his keen intellect, a look more stout than his fellows, overthrowing kings, doing his own will, speaking against God, placing himself over against Him as His antagonist, having, for a set time, all things in his hand; and above, out of sight, God enthroned in the serenity of His majesty, surrounded by the thousands of heavenly beings who serve Him; and near Him, One in human form, born of a human birth, yet, like God, above in the clouds of Heaven, the darkness shrouding Him from human eye, but reigning and to reign for ever, His Kingdom neither to pass away by decay, nor to be destroyed by violence. “God is patient, because He is eternal.” Below, all is tumult; above, all is tranquility; the Heavenly King over against the earthly potentate, until the last blasphemy draws down His lightnings upon him, the voice of his great word ascends, the judgment, of God descends. (E. B. Pusey, D.D.)


The First Two Visions of the Book of Daniel
Two emblems are here used to describe the corruption of human states in past ages, the great image and the four beasts of prey. False religion and worldly ambition, with its natural fruits of cruelty and crime, are vividly portrayed by this twofold emblem. The redemption of man from this twofold fall must begin with their separate members. Let us, therefore, trace, from the emblems themselves, the bright and holy contrast which is waiting to be realised in the coming Kingdom of God.
1. Man, in his state of nature, is dead in trespasses and sins. In the symbols of the prophecy he is an atom of the dazzling, but lifeless image; a member incorporated in the wild beast of prey. The first work of redemption is to deliver him from this state. The bestial nature is then crucified and done away; and he becomes a living member of the body of Christ. He is no longer a lifeless atom of clay in the feet of the image. The breath of a new life has been breathed into his nostrils, and, like Adam in the day of creation, he stands once mere erect in the image of God.
2. The prophecy leads us to contemplate the true character and blessedness of a righteous nation. The closing part of those visions teaches us:
(1) The intense reality of God’s providence here below.
(2) The true standard of national excellence and honour. Not wealth and riches. Not military ambition. Not the cold and heartless theories of political ungodliness; but ordinances of royalty and righteous dominion. (T. R. Birks, M.A.)


Daniel 7:13-14

One like the son of Man.
Messiah’s Kingdom
Daniel had this vision some fifty years after Nebuchadnezzar had the Vision of the composite image: but his vision harmonizes with it, and is descriptive of the same great kings and monarchies. The kingdom given to the Son of Man is the kingdom which was symbolized by the stone cut out without hands, which grew into a great mountain and filled the whole earth.
I. WHEN THIS KINGDOM WAS GIVEN TO OUR LORD.
1. Our Lord is described as coming with clouds in the day of judgment. But the coming of Christ to the universal judgment is not the coming of Christ spoken of in the text. The coming of Christ to judge the world will be the end of all things; but the coming of Christ in the text must be during the time of the fourth or Roman empire. The coming of Christ to the universal judgment will be to reward or punish mankind; but the coming of Christ in the text is to receive a kingdom for Himself. The coming of Christ to the last judgment will be to utter the final sentence and to fix the eternal state of all the righteous and the wicked; but the coming of Christ in the text refers to temporal events, and to temporal kingdoms.
2. What can the coming be but His coming from earth to Heaven at the triune of His ascension. The prophet does not represent “the Son of Man” as coming in the clouds from Heaven to earth, but as coming with the clouds of Heaven from His former residence on earth towards the Ancient of Days on his fiery throne. The description of Christ’s ascension by the Evangelist is the best explanation of this part of the vision of the prophet.
Again the prophet says, “And they brought him near before him,” i.e., they brought the Son of Man near before the Ancient of Days on His throne. Again, “There was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom.” In His hand was put the sceptre of everlasting empire. When, therefore, our Lord ascended on high, and sat down on the right hand of God, then He received His kingdom and glory.
II. THE NATURE OF HIS KINGDOM.
1. It is Divine. It is altogether of God; it is given to the Son of Man by the Ancient of Days; it is set up on earth by the God of Heaven; it is not of this world, it is a spiritual kingdom. As God alone could set up this kingdom in the world, so God alone can make men its willing subjects.
2. It is universal. From the first the greatest opposition was made to the establishment of this kingdom. But in the course of three centuries all opposition was overcome, and Christianity became the religion of the world.
3. It is everlasting. “Of his kingdom there shall be no end.” The subject is instructive, alarming, and consolatory.
(1) It teaches the magnificence of the scheme of salvation by Christ crucified. It teaches who in times past has shed, like water, the blood of the saints. It teaches the folly or the impropriety of attempting to change Popery, or to conciliate Antichrist. Popery cannot be changed. Antichrist cannot be conciliated.
(2) The subject is alarming. It is full of terrors to all who live in sin, and oppose the Kingdom of God. (J. Cawood.)


The Kingdom of the Son of Man
This chapter has been well called “a religious philosophy of history.” It is a philosophy rather than a foretelling of the future, but it is the philosophy of a prophet who speaks for God. Daniel saw four great beasts come up out of the sea of nations. These represent four kings. They are divers one from another; the first is like a lion, and the second like a bear, the third like a leopard, the fourth is dreadful and terrible, apparently indescribable. These beasts have dominion for a time until the Ancient of Days sits upon the throne of judgment. Then the dominion is taken from them and given to one like unto a Son of Man. His dominion is everlasting, and His kingdom shall not be destroyed. Consider this distinction between kings represented as “beasts” and “one like unto a Son of Man.” The four beasts have one thing in common; they are all beasts. They represent the sovereignty of brute force. They are strong, cruel, rapacious. The final kingdom is given to the representative of humanity. But these kings are men. Therefore, it is not enough to say that the Son of Man is human. In the interpretation given to the vision, the phrase is explained thus: “The Saints of the Most High.” Remember that man was made in the image of God: i.e., what distinguishes man from other animals is his moral greatness. He is an animal in his lower nature; but he has a higher nature which makes him “man.” Therefore, this vision describes the victory of the kingdom in which man’s moral nature is redeemed from sin, and is made supreme over the kingdom in which his lower animal nature is victorious. It teaches that the domination of brute force and the sovereignty of selfishness do obtain; but they are judged by God unworthy to continue, and must give place to the domination of redeemed humanity and to the sovereignty of goodness. Only a kingdom represented by a Son of Man can be lasting and universal. One of the most striking thoughts here is that a civilisation which may appear very splendid to man, may appear very unworthy to God. The prophet describes these world-powers from God’s standpoint. He judges the beast unworthy to rule, and gives the dominion to the Son of Man, Now it does not concern us to identify very closely these “beasts” with the world-powers they were meant to represent by Daniel. Probably they were the Babylonian empire under Nebuchadnezzar, the Median empire, the Persian empire made splendid for a season by Cyrus Darius. Artaxerxes and Xerxes, and the Greek dominion in Asia connected with the meteor-like glory of Alexander. These were all mighty empires. Some aspects of them appeal powerfully to our senses. No one can consider these ancient empires without being affected by their magnificence. But there is another tribunal before which they must be judged. The eyes from which no secrets are hid look beneath all this dazzling glory; and they see there—brutality! These empires are founded upon the supremacy of man’s animal nature. They rule because they are strong. They have great iron teeth! They devour much flesh. They speak great things. And this is the supremacy of the lower nature. This is a very instructive analysis of greatness. The prophet’s inward vision has been purged when he can see that all selfishness is essentially bestial. “Let us pray to be delivered from deception by dazzle! We admire power and massiveness, whether in individuals, or societies, or empires. Let us be sure to examine what lies behind the glory which appears. Nothing can match the story of the uprising of these ancient empires except the story of their fall. They seemed destined to continue for ever. It looked as if nothing could destroy them. But with startling suddenness they tottered to their fall. So must fall every dominion which is brutal in its foundations, which is founded on strength and selfish instinct rather them on goodness and reason. The only dominion which can be finally triumphant is the dominion of the saints of the Most High. What representative is like unto a Son of Man? The consideration of this phrase leads us to take a big step forward. As Daniel used the phrase, it is probable that there was no definite personal reference. The phrase is “a Son of Man,” not “the Son of Man” and in v.27 it is substituted by “the people of the saints of the Most High.” Doubtless Daniel shared the Jewish hope that the final kingdom was that inaugurated by the Messiah; but here the phrase “Son of Man” is meant only to contrast the human kingdom with that of the beasts, Now, if we compare the usage of the name in the, Gospels, it seems clear that Jesus took the name from this very passage. Daniel may not have meant to describe the Messiah by it; but when the Messiah came He adopted it at once as an admirable description of Himself. This means, therefore, that Jesus considered that He was founding that kingdom which should be universal and everlasting. He was that representative of the race whose sovereignty is guided by the highest principles of reason and goodness, and to which the Ancient of Days will give “dominion and glory and a kingdom that all people, nations and languages should serve Him.” The kingdom which Jesus founded is the kingdom of wisdom and love. It is to take the place of all kingdoms in which man’s lower nature is supreme. It is to be the sovereignty of a redeemed humanity. This philosophy of history has been justified not only by the overthrow of the ancient monarchies, but also by the gradual permeation of modern monarchies by Christian teaching. There is abundant evidence that the nineteen centuries of the Christian era have seen an ever-increasing application of Christian principles. Brute force is not worshipped to-day as it was in the days when Roman legions ruled the world. Character is becoming more and more the object of our praise. An altogether higher standard of duty obtains in every department of life. Selfishness in every form is being condemned increasingly. This transformation must go on until everything that is brutal is destroyed and man’s highest nature redeemed from sin is supreme. The dominion of the Son of Man is to be universal and it is to be everlasting. That is what you and I are to believe! I suppose that we are all prone to believe that the reforms of the past were wise and good, but that it is hopeless to expect much further change. That is the temptation of the devil to little faith, and it must be resisted earnestly. We must be much more worthy of the title, “Saints of the Most High.” And we must have more faith in the triumph of our Saviour’s kingdom upon earth. Think of this prophet away in the pre-Christian times when might was right and all the world seemed against Him. It did require faith to call this might that of a beast, and to speak of a Son of Man to whom the kingdom was to be given. But Daniel could believe it. Surely we can! “To doubt would be disloyalty, to falter would be sin.” Let us be more bold in our claims, more fearless in applying our principles, more confident of victory. The limit of the sovereignty of the Son of Man will not be until dominion and glory and a kingdom are given unto Him, and all people, nations and languages shall serve Him. Therefore, there is very much land yet to be possessed, and there is very much for us followers of the Son of Man to do. I want to ask you whether you belong to this kingdom of the Son of Man? There is a very simple test, “Is Jesus your King or is He not?” If He is, you are in His kingdom. If He is not, you are outside. If He is your Lord, you belong to a kingdom which is everlasting, and you have eternal life! Death will not divide you from His dominion. Death will set your spirit free from the trammels of your sinful fleshy nature, and will usher you into His immediate presence. But if you do not belong to His kingdom, then know that you belong to the kingdom which is essentially brutal, because you are giving the victory to your lower animal nature. Perhaps there are fine qualities in your character which you admire and seek to develop. Perhaps there are splendid moments when the Godlike in you stands erect and declares it will be supreme. But if you reject the Son of Man, you turn away from the only One who can redeem you from sin and make you a saint of the Most High. And so the crown is upon the head of that which makes you like the brutes that perish. That kingdom cannot stand. The Eternal God has judged it; it stands condemned to destruction. (J. E. Roberts, M. A.)


The Majesty of the Messiah
The venerable and saintly minister of a mighty world-empire, august in his unrivalled reputation, his unique position, and his immense personal dignity, with an enthusiasm for God and His laws which had braved the most appalling dangers from irresponsible despots, was just the man to be permitted to see the things which were hidden from the eyes of the rest of the world. There had been brought before him in a vision the survey of a series of vast temporal powers, under the forms of huge, terrific animals, horrible as nightmares, which filled even his calm sad lofty spirit with dread. And then he was reminded that behind and above all these was a greater power still, the everlasting omnipotence of God. He saw the Ancient of Days, the Eternal Being, seated, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of His head like the pure wool; His throne was like the fiery flame, and His wheels as burning fire. A fiery stream issued and came forth from before Him; thousand thousands ministered unto Him, end ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him. And then, in contradistinction to the horror of the typical monsters, one like the Son of Man, in all the beauty and gentleness of a perfect human nature, came with the clouds of Heaven, in all the strength of a Divine power, and came to the Ancient of Days. He had been before among the millions of the Heavenly host, but now His time was come; and to Him was given, not one of the temporal thrones, however splendid, because that would soon pass away and be gone for ever, but dominion and glory and a kingdom such that all peoples, nations and languages should serve Him; His dominion was an everlasting dominion, which should not pass away, and His kingdom that which should not be destroyed. It is useless for unbelievers to say that by this magnificent imagery and exalted language Daniel meant nothing but the Hebrew people in a state of improvement. The seer himself shows that he was thinking of nothing of the kind, but of the personal Divine and human Redeemer, when two chapters later he utters the solemn and mysterious words, Messiah shall be cut off, but not for Himself. He whom the wise and experienced statesman beheld shining bright and glorious in the clouds before the burning throne of the Most High was the very same as He whom Abraham saw, and David and the long line of psalmists and prophets, with different degrees of clearness, certainty, and understanding. It was the very same who was revealed in Jesus of Nazareth, of whom the awful voice from Heaven was heard declaring, “This is My beloved Son; hear Him!” These thoughts which we have gathered from the facts of the predictive element in the Old Testament, and from the life of Daniel, impress upon us with unquestionable force the eternal majesty of the Son of God. The systems and powers of the world, rise and fall, and have their sway, and fill our minds with their seeming importance; but, notwithstanding all the fret and fume of men, it is only the kingdom of righteousness and truth that is eternal, only the city of God that hath unfading foundations, only the Son that abideth ever. The Christian view of prophecy, says Principal Cairns, not only accounts for the individual facts, but for the whole. Prophecy is systematic, progressive, all-inclusive; and these features are accounted for alone by the theory of a revelation of redemption. Christ is the centre; in Him all are connected; the Messianic part of revelation is largest, most important, most like the heart in the economy of the whole. This alone accounts for the progress which is in all directions and towards all issues, but all conditioned by the approach of Christ and by the fulness of the disclosure of His Person and work, and its consequences . . . The world’s kingdoms must go through that crisis of trial and judgment, to prepare the world as s whole for the Heavenly King. With prophecy there is a Redeemer, and with Him a philosophy of history leading upwards. Without prophecy, no redemption, but law, and sin fastened down by law; any streaks in the darkness Like a prophetic glimmer, due to no rising orb, but meteoric, and born of night or chaos: Ought not the Christian, then, to give heed to this “sure word,” which is attested, as it is created, by a power above nature, just where it needs to be? May he not hope as he prays that to others this day may dawn, this morning star arise? (Archdeacon Sinclair, D.D.)


The Supreme Dominion of the Son of Man
I. THE NATURE OF THAT SUPREMACY WHICH OUR BLESSED LORD EXERCISES AS THE SON OF MAN. That this whole vision relates to the Mediatorial Person and Administration of Christ is demonstrably apparent. It is mediatorially that the designation “Son of Man” applies to the glorious Personage whom the Celestial Intelligences are represented as bringing near to the Ancient of Days. The predictions of our Lord’s mediatorial government were grievously misapprehended by the Jewish nation, not excepting Christ’s immediate followers. Rivetted by vivid delineations of Messiah’s power and glory, they overlooked those Scriptures which foretold, His profound humiliation, obedience, and sufferings. The decease which He was to accomplish at Jerusalem was an offence even to the apostles themselves. (Mar_9:31-32). Christ’s supremacy is intended to command the service of His subjects. Jehovah alone is entitled to this service from all intelligent creatures.
1. It is a spiritual service. External subjection may be yielded in the absence of all those principles and affections which alone invest it with moral character and worth. Human legislation discharges its duty when it uses all competent means for ensuring obedience to positive statutes. It cannot go further. The first demand which Jehovah prefers is, My Son, give me thy heart. Love to Heaven’s Lawgiver is the rudimental principle of obedience to His will. Of this love, mankind, without a solitary exception, are wholly destitute. Against Scriptural views, illustrated by the findings of experience, it is nugatory to oppose the testimony of superficial moralists, or dreamy poets. One main design of the mediatorial supremacy of Christ is to restore to the human soul that best of all affections, the love which is the fulfilling of the law. For this end, Messiah became “the Son of Man.” The love of God our Saviour is shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost, and becomes the living principle of new obedience.
2. The service which Christ requires from all people, nations, and languages is unreserved. Those who are redeemed by the blood and renewed by the Spirit of Christ, “have respect unto all God’s commandments.” Every requirement in the infallible directory deserves and demands our prompt and faithful observance. A genuine servant of the Son of Man is not satisfied with generalities. A common practice of false teachers in our Lord’s day was the exaltation of some favourite precepts at the expense of others which are specially irksome to flesh and blood.
3. The service which the Son of Man claims is habitual service. Temporary or occasional devotedness of heart and life to Christ is not the kind of obedience which He will ever accept. Wherever living faith is implanted, it is an undying principle of obedience. In this world the servants of the Son of Man are distinguished rather by the sincerity and fervour of their aspirations than by uniform progress in holiness.
II. THE UNIVERSAL EXTENT OF CHRIST’S SOVEREIGNTY. “All people . . . should serve Him.” The period referred to is after His resurrection. Previously to the ascension of the Son of Man, the gospel kingdomhad been, for reasons infinitely wise and good, confined almost exclusively within Palestine and its vicinity. Whilst other nations professed that measures of traditionary knowledge which a primary revelation and their occasional intercourse with the seed of Abraham supplied, it was little more than sufficient to render their spiritual darkness awfully visible.
III. THE STABILITY AND ENDLESS DURATION OF THE DOMINION OF THE SON OF MAN. The fluctuating and evanescent nature of all earthly power and glory is apparent to the most superficial observer. To a casual observer of human affairs, the destinies of the church may seem to he subjected to those sweeping resolutions which have overthrown the proudest dynasties of the world. When we speak of the stability and endless duration of the dominion of the Son of Man, our contemplations are carried forward “to the end of all things.” Practical lessons:
(1) The obligation of personal subjection to the dominion of the Son of Man. It will avail us nothing to admit the complete, universal, and everlasting supremacy of Christ “over all flesh,” unless we yield, individually, submission to His authority. True religion must begin at home.
(2) The duty of fervent and persevering prayer for the advancement of Christ’s kingdom.
(3) The duty of promoting our Redeemer’s kingdom by active and beneficent exertions. (J. Smyth, D.D.)


The Everlasting Kingdom
There is no reason to doubt that the right and true and the holy shall have the victory. All dominions hostile to Christ must give way. All kingdoms incompatible with His must be dissolved. The kingdoms of this world have their symbols in the lion, the bear, the leopard, and the fourth dreadful anal terrible beast; and by a law universally proved, their passions and discord shall precipitate their own destruction. But Christ’s kingdom has nothing anarchical, because it has nothing sinful in it; it has not one element of decay, because into it nothing that defileth can enter. Suns shall grow pale, stars shall become dim; the crescent shall wane, the crucifix shall fall from the hands of him that holds it; and Christ’s kingdom shall extend over all the earth, and all shall bless Him, and be blessed in Him. We see already tokens of that day. I take a bright view of the coming days. What progress do knowledge, science, education, Christianity, the Bible, make everywhere throughout the world at this moment? Do we not see all languages, however diversified, becoming reducible to two, three, or four at the very most—Christians becoming less earthly, and Christianity less alloyed? What are these but the tokens of the approaching glory; voices in the wilderness, preparing the way of the Lord; messengers sent before to announce that the bridegroom cometh? I see flowers of paradise begin to bloom in many a desert. I see upon all sides the sea of barbarism and superstition begin to ebb, and many a dove take wing, and fly over the length and breadth of the world’s chaotic flood, giving tokens that the Prince of Peace is on His way, warning us that the sound of His approach already breaks upon the ear. Let us hail the twilight; let us urge on, us far as we can, the coming day. (J. Cummings.)


The Son of Man Brought to the Ancient of Days
In the words before us the Son of Man is a prominent object. The government of the Son of Man is a kingdom which shall not be destroyed. The Lord Jesus, in His humanity, is called the Son of God as well as the Son of Man. Who is the Son of Man? It may he suggested that the Son of Man means the material form which the Lord took from the Virgin Mother, and that it is called the Son of Man from its mortal derivation. But this supposition will be undoubtedly corrected if we consult the teaching of the Lord with due attention. The natural, clear, and simple view, then, of the Son is that it means the humanity which the Lord, the Eternal, assumed by the instrumentality of the Virgin, containing in it Divine qualities from God the Father, and human nature, as we have it, with all its imperfections, from the Judean Mother. There may be a son born in time, but there cannot be an Eternal Son. When we speak of the Lord’s humanity, or of humanity in general, we must bear in mind that human nature is not a simple element, but a wonderful organisation of spiritual and natural forms. If the body is a wonderful congeries of organs, still more so is the soul. The portion of humanity which was fallen and in ruins, is called the natural man . . . While from the mother human nature was received in a fallen state, from the Father within there was received the embryo of a Divine human nature. What is that in the Lord which is properly meant by the Son of Man? It is sometimes said that Divine and human are opposite. They are not so; man is a likeness of his Maker. God is an infinite Divine man, (J. Bailey, A.M.)


Christ’s Kingdom—the Kingdom of the Saints
This sublime prophecy carries us on to the final establishment of Christ’s kingdom. Of that kingdom His ascension may be regarded as the pledge and commencement. He reigning even now; shall reign more visibly and fully hereafter. His kingdom is to supplant and supersede all earthly kingdoms. See vision of four beasts (empires) in previous verses. Their thrones to be “cast down” (v. 9), to make room for a nobler one. It shall excel all earthly kingdoms.
1. To be universal—“All people, nations, languages,” etc.
2. To be everlasting—“not to pass away”; “not to be destroyed.” Contrast in these respects the greatest of human kingdoms which stretch only over part of men: carry seeds of own decay: sink before superior force. It is to be the mediatorial kingdom of Christ; distinct from His empire as the everlasting God; for:
I. IT IS “GIVEN TO HIM” (v. 14). By Ancient of Days, i.e., the Eternal Father. This explained in the New Testament (Php_2:6-10). Given as the purchase of His blood, and recompense of His obedience Isa_53:12; Psa_110:7).
II. GIVEN TO HIM AS “SON OF MAN” (v. 13). The glory of the Ascension carries us back to humility of the Incarnation (Eph_4:9-10). The one is the top stone in “the mystery of godliness,” the other its foundation 1Ti_3:16). It was through His death in the flesh He conquered the usurper (Heb_2:14). By His sacrifice for sin as our High Priest, He prepared way for His throne us our King. Hence Zec_6:13. First the cross, then the crown.
III. SHARED WITH HIS PEOPLE. Saints of the Most High to “possess the kingdom”(v. 18). This was Christ’s design (Tit_2:14). This was His prayer (Joh_17:22-24). He would not have the kingdom apart fromthem. What love from Him! what honour on us! It is this which makes the subject so intensely practical. We are even now either amongst His enemies or His friends. If the former, how terrible! (Luk_19:27). “Whither I go, ye cannot come.” If the latter, how blessed! (Mat_24:34). “Where I am, there shall also my servant be.” All of us by nature enemies, rebels, etc. What Christ did to bring us from this state (Col_1:20-22). How are we to be savingly connected with His glorious reign? By faith in 1Pe_2:7-10): by true reception of Him into our hearts Joh_1:12); by grace of His Holy Spirit (Joh_3:3, etc.). Are we now the subjects of His kingdom of grace, that so we may be hereafter sharers of His reign of glory? Observe the twofold pledge of His kingdom in the Ascension and the Pentecost, and how closely they come together (next Sunday-week). Christ has taken one part of the pledge (our nature) up to Heaven; He Sends down the other part (His Spirit) to us on earth. The last that the disciples saw of Him on earth was human nature carried up; the next they knew of Him was the Holy Ghost sent down. He holds a pledge from us; we hold one from Him. Both for our assurance—His kingdom shall come.
1. Present duties resulting. Service, obedience, loyalty. He is our king, though absent; has left us work to do; talents to improve; His cause to advance; His enemies to oppose, and still heavenly-mindedness to be cultivated. (See the Collect for the day.)
2. Present comforts suggested. Such hopes for the future, and their influence (1Jn_3:1-2). Grounds for patience and expectation Heb_10:36-37). What are present sorrows in comparison with such coming joys? (Rom_8:18). Through the cross lies our way to the throne; so it was with Christ; so it must be with us; “He himself went not up,” etc. (See Visitation of Sick.) Let “Thy kingdom come” ever indissolubly link itself to “Thy will be done.” (W. P. Walsh, D.D.)