"AND another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth." Dan. 2: 39, last part.
In Dan. 10: 20 the angel said, "And now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia; and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come." Therefore we know that Grecia was the power that should succeed that of Media and Persia—that Grecia was the "third kingdom of brass" which should "bear rule over all the earth."
B. C. 359, Philip II. succeeded to the kingdom of Macedon. "Macedonia is a part of Greece."—Strabo, Fragments 10; book 8, chap. 1, sec. 1, par. 1, sec. 3, par. 1. See also "Encyc. Brit.," article "Greece," par. 1. "Greece was, at the moment, completely disorganized." Apart from Macedonia, Greece at that time consisted of nineteen distinct States,—Epirus and Thessaly composed North Greece; Acarnania, Ætolia, Locris, Doris, Phocis, Megaris, Bœotia, and Attica, composed Central Greece; and Corinthia, Sicyonia, Achaia, Elis, Messenia, Lagonia, Argolis, and Arcadia, composed the Peloponnesus or Southern Greece; the island of Eubœa, which lay along the eastern coast, formed the nineteenth State,—but taken all together the whole nineteen were only a little larger than the State of West Virginia, they having 25,811 square miles while West Virginia has 23,000. Imagine West Virginia with a coast line as great as that of Greece, divided into nineteen independent States, two of which comprise fully half of the whole area, each one of the nineteen being jealous of all the others, besides being itself separated by factions jealous of each other, with all public spirit gone—imagine such a condition of affairs as this, and you have a picture of Greece at the time that Philip became king of Macedon. See "Encyc. Brit.," articles "Macedonian Empire" and "Greece;" Rollin, "History of Philip," sections 1, 2.
It is evident that before Greece could do anything at all, of any worth, she must be united. To accomplish this, was the task that Philip had set for himself. As soon, therefore, as Philip had settled the affairs of his own kingdom he set about to bring the States of Greece into subjection to himself.
"And now, as a politician and conqueror, he resolves how he may best extend his frontiers, reduce his neighbors, and weaken those whom he is not able to conquer at present; how he may introduce himself into the affairs of Greece, take part in her intestine feuds, make himself its arbiter, join with one side to destroy the other, in order to obtain the empire over all. In the execution of this great design, he spares neither artifices, open force, presents, nor promises. He employs for this purpose negotiations, treaties, and alliances, and each of them singly in such a manner as he judges most conducive to the success of his design, expediency solely determining him in the choice of measures. We shall always see him acting under this character, in all the steps he takes thenceforth, till he assumes his last character, which is, preparing to attack the great king of Persia, and endeavoring to become the avenger of Greece, by subverting an empire which before had attempted to subject it, and which had always continued its irreconcilable enemy, either by open invasions or secret intrigues."—Rollin, Hist. of Philip, sec. 1, par. 21, 22.
In 355 B. C., the Sacred War broke out among the States of Greece, and lasted ten years, which gave Philip his desired opportunity to interfere in the internal affairs of Greece. The Sacred War was caused by the Phocæans, who dwelt near Delphi, plowing up certain grounds that had been consecrated to Apollo. When this was done, it was reported to the States-general of Greece as sacrilege. The Phocæans were summoned before the Amphictyonic Council, and after an examination of the whole affair, they were declared guilty of sacrilege, and sentenced to pay a heavy fine. They refused to submit, and took up arms. The Council met again and declared war on the Phocæans, and then the trouble began. Nearly all Greece took part in the quarrel, some of the States taking sides in favor of the god, others joining the Phocæans.
"In this general movement of the Greeks . . . Philip thought it most consistent with his interest to remain neuter. . . . He was also well pleased to see both parties weaken and consume each other, as he should thereby be enabled to fall upon them afterwards with greater ease and advantage."—Id., sec. 2, par. 7.
However, in 353 B. C., Philip interfered so far as to join Thessaly to his kingdom, and the Thessalion cavalry to his standard, and started to invade Phocis, but the Athenians seized Thermopylæ, and he was obliged to return to Macedonia for a season. At last the Thebans grew tired of the Sacred War and sought the alliance of Philip. This was just what Philip was waiting for, and he therefore "declared at once in their favor."
"There was nothing Philip had more at heart than to possess himself of Thermopylæ, as it opened to him a passage into Greece; to appropriate to himself all the honor of the Sacred War, as if he had been the principal in that affair; and to preside in the Pythian games. He was desirous of aiding the Thebans, and by their means to possess himself of Phocis; but then, in order to put this double design into execution, it was necessary for him to keep it secret from the Athenians, who had actually declared war against Thebes, and who for many years had been in alliance with the Phocæans. His business, therefore, was to place other objects in their view; and on this occasion the politics of Philip succeeded to a wonder."—Id., sec. 4, par. 2.
Just at this juncture, the Athenians also grew tired of the war, and sent two commissioners to Philip to sound him in regard to his helping to bring about a peace. He of course answered very favorably. Thereupon Athens sent ten ambassadors to inquire fully about all points in regard to the important question. The ten returned with a very favorable report indeed. Then these ten ambassadors were immediately sent back to Philip, "with full powers to conclude a peace and ratify it by oaths." After considerable delay on the part of the ambassadors, and more on the part of Philip, with his troops advancing all the time, peace was ratified, but Philip refused to include the Phocæans. When the embassy returned to Athens a controversy arose there whether Philip was to be trusted or not, and while they were contending over that question, Philip decided it by taking possession of Thermopylæ, "which opened to him the gates, and put into his hands the keys of Greece," invaded Phocis, the Phocæans sued for peace, and yielded themselves to Philip's mercy, and so ended the Sacred War, with Philip in possession of the key of Greece.
Philip immediately assembled the Amphictyonic Council to pass judgment on the Phocæans. The council decreed that all the cities of Phocis should be destroyed; that they should have no towns of more than sixty houses each; that such towns should be a certain distance apart; that none should enjoy any possessions except upon the payment of an annual tribute; and that the Phocæan seat in the council was forfeited. Then Philip demanded that the council give him the vacant seat, which as a matter of course was done, and so Philip of Macedon became a member of the general council of the States of Greece. Next the obsequious council gave him, in conjunction with the Bœatians and Thessalions, the superintendence of the Pythian games. Thus he had obtained all his wish, after which he returned to Macedon, but still holding possession of Thermopylæ.
The next seven years Philip spent in wars in Illyria, Thrace, and Scythia, and in an unsuccessful siege of Byzantium (Constantinople). In 338 B. C., another trouble, similar to that which caused the Sacred War, arose among the Locrians. The question came before the Amphictyonic Council. Philip had bribed the orators of the Council, and they persuaded the deputies that it were much better to elect Philip generalissimo of all Greece, than to assess their respective States for the means by which to hire soldiers.
Accordingly, "By a public decree, ambassadors were sent to Philip of Macedon, who, in the name of Apollo and the Amphictyons, implore his assistance, beseech him not to neglect the cause of that god which the impious Amphissians make their sport; and notify him, that for this purpose all the Greeks, associated in the council of the Amphictyons, elect him for their general, with full power to act as he shall think proper." This was the honor to which Philip had long aspired, the aim of all his views, and the end of all the engines he had set at work till that time. He therefore did not lose a moment, but immediately assembled his forces and possessed himself of Elatæa, the greatest city in Phocis."—Id., sec. 6, par. 5, 6.
Athens arose in arms, and Demosthenes, in an oratorical contest with Python, overwhelmed him, and carried the Thebans with him to an alliance with Athens against Philip. The battle of Chæronæa followed quickly. Philip was victorious, and Greece was his. The battle of Chæronæa was the first in which Alexander ever fought as a commander. He was only eighteen, yet he fully displayed the intrepid valor that characterized him in after years. He broke and entirely routed the veteran "sacred battalion," the flower of the Theban army.
"Philip used his victory moderately, for he wished to leave Greece quiet behind him when he crossed into Asia to assail the great king [of Persia]."—Encyc. Brit., article Macedonian Empire, par. 2. "Macedon at that time [the battle of Chæronæa], with no more than 30,000 soldiers, gained a point which Persia, with millions of men, had attempted unsuccessfully at Platæa, at Salamis, and at Marathon. Philip, in the first years of his reign, had repulsed, divided, and disarmed his enemies. In the succeeding ones, he had subjected, by artifice or force, the most powerful States of Greece, and had made himself its arbiter; but now he prepares to revenge the injuries which Greece had received from the Barbarians, and meditates no less a design than the destruction of their empire [the Persian Empire]. The greatest advantage he gained by his last victory (and this was the object he long had in view, and never lost sight of) was to get himself appointed, in the assembly of the Greeks, their generalissimo against the Persians. In this quality he made preparations to invade that mighty empire. He nominated, as leaders of part of his forces, Attalus and Parmenio, two of his captains, on whose valor and wisdom he chiefly relied, and made them set out for Asia Minor."—Rollin, Hist. of Philip, sec. 7, par. 1.
(To be continued.)
Faith Demonstrated by Works
No MAN can be saved by works; yet no man can be saved without works. A man is justified by faith only; yet no man can be saved by faith alone. These are paradoxes, the key to which is, that the faith by which a guilty soul is justified without works becomes, from the moment of its birth, a living principle which brings forth works of righteousness as naturally as a tree produces its own fruit. Its works demonstrate its life, which expires when it ceases to produce righteousness. Hast thou faith, O man? Show it by thy works.—Zion's Herald.
God’s Word Better Than Experiments
It is better to take God's word than to try experiments for ourselves.
We Shall See Him.
THERE are thousands on thousands of men who walk the earth, and many thousands more who sleep within its bosom, in whose hearts have burned a desire to see their Saviour's face. For centuries Christians have loved an unseen Saviour, followed an unseen Leader, trusted in an unseen Deliverer, and worshiped an unseen Lord. “Whom having not seen ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory.” They have not believed because they have seen, but they have that blessing which is pronounced on those who have not seen and yet have believed.
They have scanned with strange curiosity the records of their Saviour's life and death, but among all the particulars there laid down they have not been able to find one hint or token that would inform them concerning the personal appearance of him who is dearest to their hearts. Thus they know him not after the flesh, but he images to them the glory of the invisible God.
It is not a vain curiosity that leads Christians to desire to see their Lord. Their loving gratitude causes them to long to behold the face that was marred and spit upon, the brow that was wreathed with thorns, the form that was pierced and torn and mangled for their sins. And they have a strong assurance that at last their desire shall be granted. “They shall see his face, and his name shall be in their foreheads.” They shall be like him, for they “shall see him as he is.” Their “eyes shall see the king in his beauty;” they shall behold him whom their souls have loved with unuttered and unutterable desire.
And when that beatific vision shall salute our eyes, we shall have looked our last look on sorrows, and afflictions, and foes; we shall have witnessed the last parting, and shall have beheld the last death-bed scene; we shall have gazed on the last grave, and have read the last monumental inscription. Henceforth our eyes shall be turned to brighter scenes. In gazing on Jesus in his glory we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is, and shall be satisfied when we awake in his likeness.
There we shall see his face,
And never, never sin;
There from the rivers of his grace
Drink endless pleasures in.
—Sel.
The Obligations of the First Covenant.
By R. F. Cottrell
IN the SIGNS of Aug. 13 is an article by Brother N. J. Bowers, in which is shown with clearness that the ten commandments are not the old covenant. Those who contend that they are, ignore the record of the making of the covenant in Ex. 19, and its ratification, or "dedication," recorded in chapter 24; for the facts recorded in these chapters spoil their theory that the law of God,—the ten commandments,—is the old covenant, and consequently that all written law passed away, being nailed to the cross. Men who profess to believe in God and the Bible, attempt to maintain this blasphemous theory, right in the face of the plainest declarations of Christ and his apostles. Matt. 5: 17-19; Rom. 3: 31; Jas. 2: 8-12.
It has been shown repeatedly that the covenant consisted of mutual promises between God and the people; that it was made "concerning" the words of God, which they promised to obey, and that their obedience to his voice was the condition on which his promises to them were based.
The obligations of the covenant were mutual, as is the case with every contract between two parties. The people promised to obey the voice of God, and on this condition he promised to care for them as his peculiar people. When they had broken their promise by worshiping other gods, he was under no obligation to fulfill his promises to them. By their failure to meet the condition, they forfeited their claim to his promises. The handwriting of ordinances connected with that covenant was nailed to the cross; but the covenant itself waxed old and vanished away. It was old when the new covenant was promised through Jeremiah the prophet. "In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away."
The people were never released from their obligation to obey the voice of God which they heard from the mount. They were under obligation to obey whether they promised to do so or not. But when they had broken their promise by disobedience, the Lord was released from the obligation to fulfill his promises to them.
R. F. COTTRELL.
Covetousness.
By Epsilon
COVETOUSNESS is one of the prevalent sins of the last days. We find it second in order in the list of sins given in 2 Tim. 3: 2-5: "This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power; from such turn away."
It hardly seems possible that one should be covetous and otherwise faultless, for covetousness like other sins is not a single fault. We learn from Col. 3: 5 that covetousness is idolatry. To keep the first commandment in spirit, as well as in letter, we must love God with all the mind, soul, and strength. But a covetous person loves the object coveted more than he loves God, who claims supreme love.
We see in the list of sins at the head of this article that covetousness is associated with pride and selfishness. The apostle probably did not mean to give an unbroken chain of sins; but we can trace many of them from the one preceding it in the order. From selfishness we can trace covetousness. Selfish and also covetous people are apt to boast either by word or display. Display is a way that pride has of boasting, or of exhibiting itself in order to win the approbation of the world.
The law is like a person. We cannot wound a person at any point without causing pain. James therefore says, "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." That is, a law-breaker is a law-breaker. But a fact which few people seem to discern, is that seldom if ever one precept of the law is violated singly. Alas! alas! how many professed Christians long for the honor and attention which the world shows to its own flashy rich people!
"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." 1 John 2: 15. EPSILON.
For or Against Christ.
EVERY man exerts an influence either for good or for evil. It is impossible for any one to occupy a neutral position, where he will be absolutely without influence. A man may decline to advocate a cause without openly opposing it, but in so doing he throws his influence, to some extent, at least, against it. Christ declares, in perfect harmony with this position, "He that is not with me is against me." The extent of a man's influence, either for good or for evil, it is impossible, perhaps, to conceive. One man influences another, and gives direction to his character; he influences perhaps half a dozen more, and they influence, it may be, a score of others; and thus the wave of influence put in motion by one individual, widens and extends, perhaps, forever. A man does not, cannot, live for himself alone. He is making his impress upon the lives and characters of those around him and with whom he associates, or who are in any way brought under his influence, from day to day. This influence may promote their everlasting happiness, or it may lead to their endless ruin. In view of this fact, it is a solemn thing to live; and men cannot be too careful as to the influence they exert upon others. Have you ever thought of this? Have you ever paused to consider what kind of an influence you are exerting in society? Remember, you are responsible for your influence.—Sel.
Not a True Saying.
It is a favorite saying of the poets, that only the good is beautiful; but what if the saying only were true! If we could but know that everything which is beautiful is also good; if the evil were always repulsive to us, and only the good attractive; if Satan never came to tempt men, except with horns and hoof; then, indeed, it would be easy always to do right, and it would be incomprehensible that any one should do wrong. But there are good things which are not beautiful, and beautiful things which are not good. You may fall over a precipice without much endeavor; but it will take hard climbing to bring you to the top again. Would it not be well, before you decide upon looking for an easy place, to find out how many of the successful workers in the various spheres of labor with which you are acquainted, are men who sacrificed all for an easy place to rest in? And then—if you can—find out the men who did seek, and did obtain, "easy" places. This double search will result in giving you two classes,—men who did not seek easy places, but who are prominent and successful workers in the world to-day; and men who found easy places, and therefore have accomplished nothing. When you have the two classes before your eyes, you can judge for yourself, from what you see of them, to which class you would prefer to belong.—Sel.
Vice’s Enmity Testifies to Virtue
Vice hates virtue not because it is virtue, but because it exposes the hideousness of vice. The criminal at the court would, if he could, take vengeance upon the witness who testifies against him, not because the witness is innocent of the crime in question, but because the testimony given exposes his own sinful deformity. The enmity of vice towards virtue is, therefore, its own testimony against itself, and indirectly a tribute to virtue. "Blessed are ye when men shall revile you, and shall say all manner of evil against you, falsely, for my sake." "Woe unto you when all men speak well of you."—Sabbath Recorder.
Hypocrisy in Underpaying Poor Workers
By Nashville Christian Advocate
You “beat down” the price of the work done for you by a poor sewing woman who is compelled to take what is offered or starve, and then contribute for the conversion of the heathen to Christianity. And yet you do not know that you are a hypocrite.—Nashville Christian Advocate.
Simple Faith.
THERE was once a good woman who was well known among her circle for her simple faith and her great calmness in the midst of many trials. Another woman, living at a distance, hearing of her, said, "I must go and see that woman, and learn the secret of her strong, happy life." She went, and accosting the woman, said, "Are you the woman with the great faith?" "No," replied she, "I am not the woman with the great faith, but I am the woman with the little faith in the great God.—Sel."
The Superiority of Taking Advice
He who can take advice is sometimes superior to him who can give it.
The Sabbath-School.
By E. J. W.
LESSON FOR THE PACIFIC COAST—OCT. 10.
The Four Kingdoms.
LAST week's lesson gave us a view of Babylon in the height of its power and glory, an empire spreading over the inhabited portion of the earth, having a capital that was "the glory of kingdoms," the wonder of the world. We had also a prophetic view of its after condition, and learned from history how completely those prophecies have been fulfilled. We have now to learn how its royal power was broken.
"AND after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee." Dan. 2: 39. That is all the space devoted to the overthrow of that mighty empire. With all of its greatness, it would pass away in a night, like the last snow of winter with the spring shower. A striking lesson of the fleeting nature of all earthly possessions, is taught in that brief statement concerning the proud kingdom of Babylon. Elsewhere in the Bible we find the history which enables us to trace the succession of kingdoms; we shall first note that, and afterwards note the exact harmony with it, of the records of profane history.
IN the fifth chapter of Daniel we learn that "Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand." Verse 1. From the second verse (margin), we learn that this Belshazzar was the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar. It was formerly supposed that he was sole king, and that he was also called Nabonadius; but later researches have shown that Nabonadius was the king. He married the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, and Belshazzar was his son, and was associated with him in the empire. On this occasion Belshazzar had charge of the city, because his father, having gone out to fight the Persians, had been defeated, and had retreated to Borsippa, a few miles below. Although an army was encamped under the walls of the city, Belshazzar gave himself up to the enjoyment of an idolatrous and licentious drunken debauch. The vessels of the house of God were brought out, in contempt of Him to whom they had been dedicated, and were used in the service of the abominable deities whom they adored as supreme. But in the midst of the wild revel a hand appeared on the wall, tracing unknown characters in letters of fire. Terror struck the hearts of all, and especially Belshazzar. Great rewards were promised to the one who should read the writing, and after some delay Daniel was brought in. Read the fifth chapter entire.
"AND this is the writing that was written, MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN. This is the interpretation of the thing: MENE; God hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it. TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting. PERES; Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians." Dan. 5: 25-28. Short, but terribly plain. Notwithstanding Daniel had said, "Thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes and Persians," Belshazzar gave the promised gifts to Daniel, and went through the form of making him the third ruler in the kingdom, that is, next after himself, Nabonadius being first. The sentence thus announced by the prophet, was executed without delay. The sacred record says, "In that night was Belshazzar, the king of the Chaldeans slain, and Darius the Median took the kingdom." Verses 30, 31. From the sacred record, then, we learn that the breast and arms of silver (Dan. 2: 32), represented the empire of Media.
THE date in the margin of Daniel 5 (B. c. 538) is that which is uniformly assigned to the fall of Babylon. We have space for only a brief sketch of its capture, but before giving that, we shall note two or three prophetic utterances concerning it, that the student may see how accurately prophecy is fulfilled. "Thus saith the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings [compare Dan. 5: 6], to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut; I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight; I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron." Isa. 45: 1, 2. "And I will make drunk her princes, and her wise men, her captains, and her rulers, and her mighty men; and they shall sleep a perpetual sleep, and not wake, saith the King, whose name is the Lord of hosts." Jer. 51: 57.
Now we will quote a few paragraphs from Rawlinson (Fourth Mon., chap. 8, par. 51-53), since he gives the description in the most condensed form. As you read, compare with the above texts, and with Daniel 5. Bear in mind, also, the description of Babylon, as given last week:—
"Withdrawing the greater part of his army from the vicinity of the city, and leaving behind him only certain corps of observation, Cyrus marched away up the course of the Euphrates for a certain distance, and there proceeded to make a vigorous use of the spade. His soldiers . . . dug a channel or channels from the Euphrates, by means of which a great portion of its water would be drawn off, and hoped in this way to render the natural course of the river fordable. When all was prepared, Cyrus determined to wait for the arrival of a certain festival, during which the whole population were wont to engage in drinking and reveling, and then silently in the dead of night to turn the water of the river, and make his attack. All fell out as he hoped and wished. The festival was held with even greater pomp and splendor than usual; for Belshazzar, with the natural insolence of youth, to mark his contempt of the besieging army, abandoned himself wholly to the delights of the season, and himself entertained a thousand lords in his palace. Elsewhere the rest of the population was occupied in feasting and dancing. Drunken riot and mad excitement held possession of the town; the siege was forgotten; ordinary precautions were neglected. Following the example of their king, the Babylonians gave themselves up for the night to orgies in which religious frenzy and drunken excess formed a strange and revolting medley.
"Meanwhile, outside the city, in silence and darkness, the Persians watched at the two points where the Euphrates entered and left the walls. Anxiously they noted the gradual sinking of the water in the river bed; still more anxiously they watched to see if those within the walls would observe the suspicious circumstance, and sound an alarm through the town. Should such an alarm be given, all their labors would be lost. If, when they entered the river-bed, they found the river-walls manned and the river-gates fast-locked, they would indeed be 'caught in a trap.' Enfiladed on both sides by an enemy whom they could neither see nor reach, they would be overwhelmed and destroyed by his missiles before they could succeed in making their escape. But, as they watched, no sounds of alarm reached them—only a confused noise of revel and riot, which showed that the unhappy townsmen were quite unconscious of the approach of danger.
"At last shadowy forms began to emerge from the obscurity of the river-bed, and on the landing places opposite the river-gates scattered clusters of men grew into solid columns,—the undefended gateways were seized—a war-shout was raised—the alarm was taken and spread—and swift runners started off to 'show the king of Babylon that his city was taken at one end.' In the darkness and confusion of the night, a terrible massacre ensued. The drunken revelers could make no resistance. The king, paralyzed with fear at the awful handwriting on the wall, which too late had warned him of his peril, could do nothing even to check the progress of the assailants, who carried all before them everywhere. Bursting into the palace, a band of Persians made their way to the presence of the monarch, and slew him on the scene of his impious revelry. Other bands carried fire and sword through the town. When morning came Cyrus found himself undisputed master of the city, which, if it had not despised his efforts, might with the greatest ease have baffled them."
THE historian says that if the city had not despised the efforts of Cyrus, it might with the greatest ease have baffled them. Very true; but it had been prophesied that they should be drunken, and the word of God, which foretold the destruction of Babylon, cannot fail. For further description of this affair, see Rawlinson, at length, and "Rollin's Ancient History," Book 4, chap. 1, article 2, sections 1-4.
"AND Darius the Median took the kingdom." Says Rawlinson: "The genius of Cyrus was essentially that of a conqueror, not of an administrator. . . . In Babylon he gave the entire direction of affairs into the hands of a Mede, to whom he allowed the title and style of king."—Fifth Mon., chap. 7, par. 35. Rollin says (Book 4, chap. 1, art. 3, sec. 1): "When Cyrus judged he had sufficiently regulated his affairs in Babylon, he thought proper to take a journey into Persia. In his way thither, he went through Media, to visit his uncle Cyaxares, to whom he carried very magnificent presents, telling him at the same time that he would find a noble palace at Babylon, all ready prepared for him; and that he was to look upon that city as his own. Indeed, Cyrus, as long as his uncle lived, held the empire only in co-partnership with him, though he had conquered and acquired it by his own valor. Nay, so far did he carry complaisance, that he let his uncle enjoy the first rank. It is Cyaxares who is called in Scripture Darius the Mede, and we shall find that under his reign, which lasted but two years, Daniel had several revelations." At the death of Darius, Cyrus very naturally assumed sole control of the empire. See Dan. 6: 28.
"AND another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth." Dan. 2: 39. We have found two universal empires, Babylon and Medo-Persia, corresponding respectively to the head of gold, and the breast and arms of silver, of the image. We have seen (Dan. 2: 38) that Babylon was a universal empire. Ezra 1: 2 shows the same of the Persian monarchy: "Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The Lord God of Heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he hath charged me to build him an house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah." In harmony with this, Rawlinson says (Fifth Mon., chap. 7, par. 26): "Babylon became 'an astonishment and a hissing'—all her prestige vanished—and Persia stepped manifestly into the place, which Assyria had occupied for so many centuries, of absolute and unrivaled mistress of Western Asia." In those days, whoever ruled Asia, ruled the world.
NOW we have the third kingdom in succession. That it is also a universal monarchy, is stated in the verse just quoted. A very brief reference to another prophecy to identify this third kingdom, must suffice for this lesson. In the 8th of Daniel, verses 3-8, we find part of a vision which Daniel saw. He saw a ram standing by a river; the ram was so very powerful and fierce that no beast could stand before him, "but he did according to his own will." While the prophet was still looking, he saw a goat567come from the west, running with incredible swiftness. This goat came to the ram, with fury, and smote him, and cast him down to the ground, and stamped upon him; and there was no power that could save the ram from the wrath of the goat. Verses 20 and 21 explain this: "The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Grecia." Then since the goat overpowered the ram, the prophecy teaches that Grecia succeeded Medo-Persia as mistress of the world.
"AND the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron; forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things; and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise." Dan. 2: 40. In passing, we must ascertain the name of this fourth universal empire, for universal it must be, since it is more powerful than all the preceding. This is the last of a series of four kingdoms reaching from the time of the prophet to the close of earthly things. Three—Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Grecia—have already been identified. Now, although this one is nowhere named in prophecy, if we anywhere find mention of a universal empire, other than the three just named, we shall know that it is the fourth, the one represented by the legs of iron.
SUCH a kingdom we find mentioned in Luke 2: 1: "And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Cæsar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed." None but a universal monarch could issue such a decree, and his name is sufficient to identify him as a Roman. So, then, Rome was the fourth kingdom.
"AND whereas thou sawest the feet and toes part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men; but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay." Dan. 2: 41-43.
THIS partially explains itself; the full interpretation must be left for another lesson. We simply note the closing act. "And in the days of these kings shall the God of Heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever." Verse 44. Here we have the fifth universal empire—the kingdom of the God of Heaven—represented by the stone, which dashed the image in pieces. That this kingdom is yet future, is clearly evident from the fact that earthly governments are yet found on this earth; when that is set up, no room will be found for them. Its subjects, moreover, will never die, for it is not to be "left to other people." Its king will be the one of whom David prophesied that his throne should endure "as the days of Heaven" (Ps. 89: 29); and its subjects will be all who, at the coming of the Lord, are found "meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light."