The Expositor's Bible: The Book of DanielFarrar, F. W. (Frederic William)
Religion
The Expositor's Bible: The Book of Daniel
Farrar, F. W. (Frederic William)
Bible. Daniel -- Commentaries
The reason of the attempt is to make the termination of the
prophecy coincide with the coming of Christ, which is then--quite
unhistorically--regarded as followed by the destruction of the fourth
and last empire. But the interpretation can only be thus arrived at
by a falsification of facts. For the victory of Christianity over
Paganism, so decisive and so Divine, was in no sense a destruction of
the Roman Empire. In the first place that victory was not achieved
till three centuries after Christ's advent, and in the second place
it was rather a continuation and defence of the Roman Empire than its
destruction. The Roman Empire, in spite of Alaric and Genseric and
Attila, and because of its alliance with Christianity, may be said to
have practically continued down to modern times. So far from being
regarded as the shatterers of the Roman Empire, the Christian popes and
bishops were, and were often called, the _Defensores Civitatis_. That
many of the Fathers, following many of the Rabbis, regarded Rome as the
iron empire, and the fourth wild beast, was due to the fact that until
modern days the science of criticism was unknown, and exegesis was
based on the shifting sand.[312] If we are to accept their authority on
this question, we must accept it on many others, respecting views and
methods which have now been unanimously abandoned by the deeper insight
and advancing knowledge of mankind. The influence of Jewish exegesis
over the Fathers--erroneous as were its principles and fluctuating
as were its conclusions--was enormous. It was not unnatural for the
later Jews, living under the hatred and oppression of Rome, and still
yearning for the fulfilment of Messianic promises, to identify Rome
with the fourth empire. And this seems to have been the opinion of
Josephus, whatever that may be worth. But it is doubtful whether it
corresponds to another and earlier Jewish tradition. For among the
Fathers even Ephræm Syrus identifies the _Macedonian_ Empire with the
fourth empire, and he may have borrowed this from Jewish tradition.
But of how little value were early conjectures may be seen in the fact
that, for reasons analogous to those which had made earlier Rabbis
regard Rome as the fourth empire, two mediæval exegetes so famous as
Saadia the Gaon and Abn Ezra had come to the conclusion that the fourth
empire was--the Mohammedan![313]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account