This article serves as 'Footnote 13.1' for the previous posting, 'The Messiah Expected by the Jews: An Overview of the Last Days.'
1 In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon Daniel had a dream and visions of his head upon his bed: then he wrote the dream, and told the sum of the matters.
2 Daniel spake and said, I saw in my vision by night, and, behold, the four winds of the heaven strove upon the great sea.
3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another.
4The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings: I beheld till the wings thereof were plucked, and it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it.
5 And behold another beast, a second, like to a bear, and it raised up itself on one side, and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it: and they said thus unto it, Arise, devour much flesh.
6 After this I beheld, and lo another, like a leopard, which had upon the back of it four wings of a fowl; the beast had also four heads; and dominion was given to it.
7 After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns.
8 I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.
— Daniel 7:1-8
The vision of the four beasts in Daniel 7 is widely regarded as a prophetic parallel to the great statue in Daniel 2. Specifically, this interpretation equates the lion with the head of gold, the bear with the chest of silver, the leopard with the belly and thighs of bronze, and the ten-horned beast with the iron legs—Rome. This view remains highly compelling as the traits of each historical empire correspond with the symbolic imagery of the animals with uncanny precision.
Take, for example, how the division of the Greek Empire among four generals perfectly mirrors the four heads and four wings of the leopard. Consider Rome: its character was defined not by cultural refinement, but by raw, crushing military and administrative power—a reality that fits the terrifying image of the final beast to a tee. The fact that these beasts are depicted in the exact order of their historical rise only solidifies this as the undeniable interpretation.
The prophecies in the Book of Daniel aren't left to human guesswork; they possess a striking internal integrity. We see this in chapter 2, where Daniel interprets Nebuchadnezzar’s dream by divine revelation, and again in chapter 8, where an angel explicitly identifies the ram and the goat. The text itself draws the lines, leaving no room for groundless speculation. The vision of the four beasts in chapter 7 follows this exact same pattern.
"I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things.
These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.
But the saints of the most High shall take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever."
(Daniel 7:16-18)
Here, the angel provides a direct interpretation, leaving no room for human interpretation. Crucially, the text defines these four beasts as entities that "will rise" from the earth—placing their appearance firmly in the future.
However, the very first verse of this chapter presents a crucial detail. This vision was received during the first year of Belshazzar. If we identify the lion as Babylon, we face a striking contradiction with the angel’s own words. The angel explicitly says these beasts 'shall arise' in the future—but at that very moment, Babylon wasn't a future power; it was the reigning one.
By Belshazzar’s first year, Cyrus of Persia had already launched the rebellion that would topple Babylon only fourteen years later. This means even Persia (the bear) fails to fit the angel's 'future' description. The same applies to the others: Greece was already flourishing under its city-state system, and Rome was already stepping onto the world stage, establishing its early Republic. None of these were truly 'future' entities when the vision was given.
Looking at the evidence, this popular interpretation simply fails to square with the angel’s direct testimony. The mainstream view tries to bridge this gap by assuming that 'rising' refers to the moment an empire reaches its peak—specifically, when it secures dominance over the Jerusalem region. But even if we grant that premise, we can’t escape the truth: this prophecy came during the twilight of Babylon. Babylon wasn't 'about to rise'—she had long been ruling. To hold onto the conventional view, we’re forced into a clumsy rationalization, acting as if Babylon was exempted from the angel's own rules for the sake of the theory. But is this really how we should handle the Word of God?
We cannot avoid the conclusion: interpreting the four beasts as Babylon and its historical successors creates a literal, head-on collision with the interpretation provided by the text itself.
Let’s take a closer look at the verse describing the fourth beast in verse 7:
"After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns."
The traditional interpretation of this passage is that the fourth beast—Rome—was fundamentally different in character from the "previous" empires of Babylon (the lion), Persia (the bear), and Greece (the leopard). The traditional view holds that Rome’s overwhelming military might and iron-fisted rule forced conquered nations into a single, standardized system—a drastic break from the governing styles of the empires that came before it.
Take a closer look at that phrase: 'It was different from all the beasts that were before it.' Conventional interpretations almost exclusively treat this 'before' as a marker of chronological time, assuming it refers to the empires that had already passed into history.
However, in almost every language, the word "before" carries a double meaning: it can refer to time (previous) or space (in front of). Linguistically, the meaning of "before" usually evolves from a spatial physical presence to a temporal chronological sequence. To understand exactly how this word functions in this specific verse, we need to look at how it is actually used throughout the Scriptures.
The original Aramaic word here is qŏḏām. At its core, it simply means 'before' or 'in the presence of.' Let’s look at how this word plays out in other parts of the Bible.
"The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read 'before' me."
(Ezr 4:18)
"Now when the copy of king Artaxerxes' letter was read 'before' Rehum..."
(Ezr 4:23)
"...those deliver thou 'before' the God of Jerusalem."
(Ezr 7:19)
"...for ye have prepared lying and corrupt words to speak 'before' me..."
(Dan 2:9)
"...there is none other that can shew it 'before' the king..."
(Dan 2:11)
"...bring me in 'before' the king ... Then Arioch brought in Daniel 'before' the king..."
(Dan 2:24-25)
The typical usage of the word "before" across these verses makes the meaning of the original Aramaic word qŏḏām crystal clear. Beyond the examples already mentioned, this word appears in the following passages:
Dan 2:10; 27, 36; Dan 3:13; Dan 4:2(1), 6, 7, 8; Dan 5:13, 15, 17, 19, 23; Dan 6:1(1), 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 22, 26(1); Dan 7:8(2), 10, 13, 20(2)
(1) In Daniel 4:2 and 6:1, expressions such as "I thought it good" and "It pleased Darius" are translations of the Aramaic idiom šāp̄ar qŏḏām (literally, "it was good before me"). Rather than describing a mere emotional state, this phrase denotes a spatial or relational judgment made when an object is brought into the observer’s immediate presence. It conveys that something is 'fit to be presented before my face.' This further confirms that qŏḏām consistently points to a tangible, face-to-face encounter rather than a vague psychological feeling.
Ezr 7:14; Dan 2:6, 15, 18; Dan 5:24
In these five verses, qŏḏām may be interpreted similarly to the English "of" or "from," but its root remains grounded in "spatial presence." Whether being sent by a king (Ezr 7:14), receiving a reward from a king (Dan 2:6), or an edict being issued (Dan 2:15), the term isn't just about an abstract source. It visually emphasizes authority manifested directly from the presence of the throne. The same applies to seeking mercy before God (Dan 2:18) or the hand appearing to write on the wall (Dan 5:24). These events are described as originating from the very Presence of God.
As shown through this comprehensive review, the word qŏḏām in Daniel 7:7 is almost exclusively used to signify being "in the presence of" a king or a specific object—denoting a spatial front. Consequently, it is a linguistic fact that not a single instance exists in the entire biblical text where this word conveys a temporal meaning, such as "prior to" or "before" in time.
The Traditional View treats this 'before' in Daniel 7:7 as a simple chronological timeline. However, that perspective loses all credibility when faced with the specific descriptions in the very next verses—7:8(2) and 7:20(2).
"I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things."
(Daniel 7:8)
Let’s imagine this vision as a "still frame" or a snapshot in time.
If qŏḏām were merely a chronological marker, the statement in verse 8—that three horns were plucked out "before" (in front of) the little horn—would imply that the three horns had already been plucked out long ago, before the little horn ever appeared. But that isn't what the text says. Instead, it depicts a scene of immediate, physical upheaval—where the little horn forces its way up, uprooting the other three in real time. Logic dictates that a horn which has already exited the stage of history cannot be physically uprooted by a new player that hasn't even arrived yet.
However, when we read this as "in the presence of," the scene gains immediate, vivid clarity. (It is, in fact, the only reading that makes sense.) As the little horn rises, it engages in a violent, real-time power struggle, uprooting the three horns that are standing right there in its path, face-to-face.
Verse 20(2) is even more decisive:
"And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows."
(Daniel 7:20)
Even the angel, while explaining the vision, uses the exact same word (qŏḏām) to describe the falling of the three horns. As the heaven-sent interpreter of this revelation, the angel’s choice of words sets the gold standard. If it’s undeniable that 'before' means a spatial clash here, then consistency demands we apply the same logic to verse 7. The fourth beast isn't just coming after the others in time; it is standing face-to-face with them in the same prophetic arena.
This realization—that "before (qŏḏām)" strictly denotes a "spatial encounter"—finds its ultimate confirmation in verse 12:
"As concerning the rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away: yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time."
(Daniel 7:12)
According to the Traditional Succession Model, Babylon, Persia, and Greece should have vanished into the annals of history, their "lives" long extinguished. Yet, Scripture explicitly declares that while the fourth beast faces its doom, the lives of the other three are prolonged. This is the smoking gun. It proves these beasts are not disconnected, century-old ghosts, but contemporary entities coexisting in the same prophetic space.
When we restore the original meaning of these terms and revisit verses 7 and 17, the conclusion is inescapable: these four beasts are all contemporary powers that coexist. This is not a sequential succession of ancient empires. We must take the angel at his word—every one of these beasts was a future entity when the prophecy was given. A historical Rome could never spatially coexist with a long-dead Babylon, let alone 'trample' it into the dust.
Stepping away from the view that the beasts of Daniel 7 are past empires does not mean we abandon the prophetic value of the "Succession of Empires." The grand prophetic framework of human history, stretching from Babylon to Rome, remains perfectly intact within the vision of the statue in Daniel 2 where Daniel himself gives the unmovable interpretation. In the same vain, we must allow Daniel 7 to speak for itself, honoring the angel's interpretation without forcing it into a mold. The moment we ignore the text's explicit direction just to fit it into the "proven history" of Daniel 2, we forfeit a vital piece of the prophetic puzzle reserved for the end times.
"And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority."
(Revelation 13:1-2)
It is a widely held view that the beast of Revelation 13 is intimately connected to the beasts of Daniel 7. However, the traditional consensus assumes that the attributes of long-gone empires—the Leopard, the Bear, and the Lion—are simply condensed into the end-times Antichrist system. Under this view, the features of these three beasts appear within the "one beast" as a sort of symbolic legacy, suggesting that past history merely serves as a prototype for the future.
... and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns.
And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. (Rev 17:3, 16)
The depiction of the Whore "riding" the seven-headed, ten-horned beast—representing the lion (1), bear (1), leopard (4), and the fourth beast (1)—along with its grim finale where the beast and the ten horns turn on her in hatred, burning her to ashes, has long plagued conventional commentary. In fact, the sheer volume of these interpretive dilemmas easily rivals the messy web of competing "-isms" in eschatology.
To put it plainly, traditional views offer no satisfying answers to some very basic questions: How can a woman be riding on empires that died out long ago? How do these long-gone kingdoms somehow come back to physically burn her to the ground? Or, for those who claim the Whore is Rome, how does it make any sense for Rome to be riding Rome? Unable to solve these riddles, many interpreters take an unfortunate detour, dismissing the entire passage and its vivid symbols as mere spiritualized, abstract allegories. Yet, all of these glaring contradictions vanish the moment we fix both the Whore and the four-yet-one beast of Daniel 7 as literal realities of the last days.
But as we have established in the preceding section, the four beasts of Daniel 7 are distinct and independent powers that coexist simultaneously in the end times. If that is true, then the beast in Revelation must be the very embodiment of those same entities found in Daniel. When we interpret it this way, the description in Revelation 13 becomes a far more concrete and vivid prophetic roadmap. The beast is no longer a spiritual successor inheriting the ghosts of the past; it is a dominant power that absorbs three living, breathing nations—the Lion, the Bear, and the Leopard—placing them under its absolute control.
Let’s summarize: The Lion, the Bear, and the Leopard in Daniel 7 are major, sovereign powers that exert massive influence on the world stage in the end times. However, as Revelation depicts, they are eventually subjugated and folded into a global system by the overwhelming force of the fourth beast—the Antichrist system. Yet, just as Daniel 7 shows them in their distinct forms, these nations persist within that integrated order, maintaining their unique identities. This reading provides a vivid prophetic roadmap—one that honors the literal word of Daniel 7 and brings it into perfect harmony with Revelation.
In the prophetic language of Scripture, the 'beast' is always a symbol of a Gentile power that directly impacts—and usually afflicts—Israel. In this framework, Israel is depicted as the 'human' element, standing in contrast to the predatory nature of the nations. Consequently, the beasts appearing in the "Day of the LORD" prophecies throughout the Old Testament follow this same interpretive structure. Simply put, these beasts are entities that will wreak havoc on Israel in the end times.
"Woe unto you that desire the day of the LORD! to what end is it for you? the day of the LORD is darkness, and not light.
As if a man did flee from a lion, and a bear met him; or went into the house, and leaned his hand on the wall, and a serpent bit him."
(Amos 5:18-19)
The prophecy in Amos explicitly declares the nature of the "Day of the LORD," showing Israel being accosted by a succession of threats—the lion, the bear, and the serpent. This strikingly mirrors the beasts of Daniel 7, adding significant weight to the view that these are contemporary threats coexisting in the Day of the Lord, not back in the days of history.
The imagery of a "man entering his house" in Amos strongly evokes the modern movement of Jewish return to their land—a movement often linked to the theme of the False Messiah and the prophetic prerequisites for the Messianic age. [See fn 8. 2.2) in 'The Messiah Expected by the Jews: An Overview of the Last Days.']
By breaking free from the Traditional Succession Model—which relegates these beasts to the distant, dead past—and re-establishing a strictly literal interpretation, we unlock a vivid, three-dimensional portrait of the end times.
In many cases, Biblical prophecy operates on the principle of "witness through fulfillment." Prophecy is not given so that humans can perfectly predict every detail before it happens; rather, its purpose is to confirm that God’s Word has been fulfilled as events unfold, anchoring our faith (John 14:29). It is, therefore, extremely dangerous to rush ahead and force current trends into a prophetic mold. History is strewn with the wreckage of failed interpretations—the endless attempts to label the EU as the Ten Horns, the Pope as the Antichrist, or specific figures like Obama or Trump as the final enemy, and the tendency to see every major conflict as the 'War of Gog and Magog.'
The description of the "ten toes" (the ten horns) in Daniel 2 stands as an unshakeable prophetic standard. That era is described as a world where the "seed of men" mingles with a different kind of seed—a world that defies human logic, where the global order has been upended by an unprecedented upheaval. Instead of grasping at shadows through hasty predictions, we must focus on establishing a sound prophetic framework. If this framework is in place, we will be able to identify the events as they emerge. Those who witness the fulfillment will gain a clear sense of their position, realizing exactly where they are within the unfolding timeline of the Word.
In that sense, I do not wish to speak recklessly regarding which specific nations the Lion or the Leopard might represent. However, I feel the urge to address the description of the lion-like beast that was "made to stand on two feet like a man" and was "given the heart of a man." Within the prophetic structure where beasts represent Gentile nations and Israel is symbolized as the "man," this imagery is quite telling.
In this light, the passage suggests the possibility that a Gentile nation (the Lion) will project or even usurp the identity of Israel. Historically, we have already seen instances where certain nations claimed to be the descendants of the "Lost Tribes of Israel" or argued that their monarchy inherited the Throne of David, even practicing Jewish traditions like circumcision. This suggests that the Lion of prophecy is not merely a geopolitical powerhouse, but an entity that emerges in the end times through calculated deception, laying claim to Israel’s legitimacy and birthright.
This article has been translated from the original Korean text through automatic translation and may contain errors.
