How to Interpret Apocalyptic Prophecies

1. Intro
   1. We’re now moving to the second half of Daniel, which is quite different from the first half.
      1. In chapters 1-6, we can straightforwardly study each story in turn.
      2. However, the second half requires a lot more study to understand, and lends itself more to thematic or topical study.
      3. Today, we’re going to lay the foundation for studying the second half of Daniel.
   2. Many different ideas about Bible prophecy
   3. The second half of Daniel is built around time prophecies.
   4. How can we interpret them?
2. Three schools of thought:
   1. Preterism teaches that nearly all the end-time prophecies in the Bible (including those in Daniel) actually relate to events taking place around the time when the prophecy was written.
      1. Thus, preterists see the book of Daniel as having been written much later than the time of Daniel (2nd century BC) and
      2. see most of the prophecies as relating to the Maccabean period, when the Jews were fighting against the Greek ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes.
      3. A large number of Bible commentaries and study Bibles, perhaps the majority, follow the preterist school.
   2. Futurism teaches the opposite: Nearly all apocalyptic prophecies refer to a time in the far future, a time which hasn’t arrived yet.
      1. The best known example of this view is the Left Behind series, which interprets the end-time prophecies as taking place after the rapture of the church, led by a global dictator known as the antichrist.
   3. Historicism sees the time prophecies as sweeping through history, usually beginning in the prophet’s time and continuing until the Second Coming.
      1. Historicism has lost a lot of popularity today, but it was once the dominant school among Protestants.
3. So, which school is right? And why does it matter?
   1. 2 Peter 1:19-21: Because scripture isn’t of private interpretation, we must let the Bible explain itself.
   2. Rather than going deep in the woods quoting scholar after scholar, and thereby running around in circles, let’s let the Bible tell us which one is correct.
   3. We’re going to examine three prophecies in Daniel to find the answer.
4. Daniel 2
   1. Back in the middle of November we studied Daniel 2. Let’s do a bit of review.
   2. Remember that King Nebuchadnezzar had a dream of a giant statue made of different metals: Daniel 2:31-35.
   3. Then, Daniel gave the king the interpretation
      1. Vv. 37-40: There would be a succession of empires, which we identified as Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome.
      2. Vv. 41-43: Rome would be followed by a divided Europe which could never be permanently reunited. We learned about a number of people who have attempted to reunite Europe, and have seen that they all have failed—just as this prophecy predicted.
      3. Vv. 44, 45: A prediction of the Second Coming, which we’re still looking forward to.
   4. This prophecy is the easiest to interpret, because Daniel tells us exactly how to interpret it. Therefore, there is very little debate about what it means—up through the legs of iron, at least.
   5. So, which method of interpretation makes the most sense here?
      1. Preterism (the past) fails, because the prophecy specifically tells us about the Second Coming, which is hardly in the past.
      2. Futurism fails, because the prophecy clearly begins in the time of King Nebuchadnezzar.
      3. However, historicism fits perfectly. What we see in Daniel 2 is a sweep of history, from Daniels time to ours and beyond.
5. Daniel 7
   1. The next apocalyptic prophecy in Daniel is found in chapter 7.
   2. We’re going to consider only the basic points today and deal with it more fully later. There’s too much in Daniel 7 for us to consider now.
      1. For now, we’ll concern ourselves with the basic principles of interpretation.
   3. In this chapter Daniel has the following dream: Daniel 7:2-14
   4. Before we delve into the interpretation, let’s make a few observations:
      1. Just like Daniel 2, this dream contains a succession of things. In Daniel 2, it was metals, while in chapter 7, it’s beasts. This similarity is instructive, as we’ll see in a bit.
      2. While the two visions share a lot of similarities, the vision of the beasts goes into significantly more detail toward the end.
   5. So, what does this dream mean?
      1. Remember, we always need to let the Bible interpret itself. There are places where we have to do a fair bit of comparison work to uncover the interpretation, but the basic framework is given to us in Daniel 7.
      2. Vv. 15-18: The four beasts are explained quickly, but they clearly correspond to the kingdoms of Daniel 2.¹
         1. In case there’s any doubt, here’s a brief anecdote.
            1. While I was in London, I visited the British Museum. It’s a great place, and well worth a visit if you’re ever in that city.
            2. While there, I saw their exhibit on ancient Babylon. They had a portion of a wall from the city, and you could see on it, very clearly, many figures of winged lions; this clearly was a well-known emblem for Babylon.
            3. Thus, it’s clear that the prophecy was intended to be interpreted as a succession of kingdoms.
      3. The rest of the dream is much more detailed than Daniel 2, and we’ll cover it at a later time. For now, it will suffice to read a part of the interpretation: Vv. 23-27.
         1. We see in the fourth beast and its horns a parallel with both the legs of iron and the feet of iron and clay, and we learn a lot about that period beyond what Daniel 2 tells us.
         2. We read about a persecuting power, and about a coming judgment, both of which are new details.
         3. Finally, we finish with the Second Coming, just like the last vision.
   6. Which interpretation school is most appropriate here? Clearly, it’s the historicist school, since we have the same historical sweep here as in chapter 2.
      1. This is important, because, as we’ll see later, Daniel 7 is foundational for several key doctrines. Misunderstandings of the historicist method have significantly undermined many people’s understanding of these doctrines.
      2. As an example, we notice in Daniel 7 that there’s a judgment which takes place before the Second Coming (vv. 26, 27). Many people have rejected the idea of a so-called pre-advent judgment, but it’s here clearly in the text. We’ll have an entire sermon on the judgment later.
6. Daniel 8
   1. Two chapters aren’t enough to prove that the historicist method is the correct one, so let’s examine the next one: Daniel 8. According to verse 1, this vision is closely linked to the vision in Daniel 7.
   2. The vision: Daniel 8:2-14
      1. Notice that there is another succession of beasts, which the last chapter told us were kings or kingdoms.
      2. Notice also that this vision and the last feature horns, which are also rulers.
   3. What’s the interpretation? Like in Daniel 7, we’ll only touch on a few highlights today.
      1. Vv. 16-25
      2. Medo-Persia and Greece are explicitly mentioned here, giving a clear starting point, and the angel/messenger specifically says the vision concerns the time of the end. Thus, this is also a historicist vision.
      3. Many people have tried to make this vision refer to the Maccabean period, but that doesn’t fit the wider context. Again, this is key for our understanding of the antichrist system as well as the pre-advent judgment.
7. Which is the correct school of interpretation?
   1. We could keep going on, following historicist sweeps in Daniel. Then, we could turn to Revelation, and we would see that almost the entire book is a series of historicist sweeps.
8. So what? Why does this matter? How does it affect us today?
   1. This understanding is foundational to understanding a number of important Bible doctrines, such as the identity and agenda of the beast/antichrist power, the final events of the earth and the Second Coming of Jesus, and the judgment.
   2. Understanding the historicist method of interpretation helps shield us from false teachings, such as the idea that there will be a second chance to repent after the rapture.
   3. Most importantly, we see just how accurate God is in His foretelling of the future. This should lead us to trust Him more.

Footnotes