So what is it? Are the 10 horns part of the 4th Beast or not? If you intend to make a point based on this contradiction it can't stand.
You're mixing together two separate visions, the vision here in Dan 7 and the vision in Rev 12-17. Let's compare...Originally Posted by Revelation Man
Dan 7: 4th Beast from the sea with 10 horns and a little horn
Rev 12: Red Dragon with 7 heads and 10 horns, with crowns on the 7 heads.
Rev 13: Beast from the sea with 10 horns and 7 heads, with crowns on the 10 horns and a 2nd Beast with 2 horns
Rev 17: Scarlet Beast with 7 heads and 10 horns: 7 hills and 7 kings--6th king "is"
The vision in Rev 12-17 is noticeably different from the 4th Beast in Dan 7 in the sense that the latter is a "4th Beast," whereas the former, the Scarlet Beast of Rev 17, was the *6th king* in John's day. What binds the two together is the fact both have "10 horns." Since the horns are crowned with the 1st Beast of Rev 13, and the 4th Beast of Dan 7 also has "kingly" horns, the 4th Beast of Dan 7 and the 1st Beast of Rev 13 are the most closely aligned.
My thought here is that the Red Dragon of Rev 12, with 7 heads and 7 crowns, emphasizes the 7 heads as a succession of Kingdoms. Satan is a timeless being and has existed through all of these Kingdoms. And the 1st Beast of Rev 13, with its 10 horns and 10 crowns, emphasize a coalition of nations supporting the Antichristian Empire. Antichrist is a man who exists only at a particular moment in history, when his coalition takes form.
There's no question the Revelation derives its material from the 4th Beast of Dan 7. What's in question is the degree to which we can compare them? For example, I can't say for sure that Antichrist is the 7th head of the Beast of Rev 13. The "Little Horn" of Dan 7, the Antichrist, is not said in Dan 7 to be the "7th Head." For all I know the Antichrist, or the "Little Horn," could be the "8th Head" of Rev 17!
Yes, this is the kind of argument I've been using lately, that the scenario in Revelation is largely derived from Dan 7!Originally Posted by Revelation Man
Yea, that's a little confusing to me. How can this Beast, which reigns for 3.5 years, have 10 horns, or kings, that only reign with the Antichrist for "one hour?" Is this a literal "hour?" Perhaps. Perhaps the 10 kings support the Antichrist for 3.5 years, and yet only go into battle with him for a single hour? I don't know. It does seem to support my contention that the Revelation and its "wrath" is largely focused on a single day and hour at the end of the age. Many people falsely equate the entire 3.5 years of Antichrist's reign with a "time of divine wrath." I don't believe that to be the case.Originally Posted by Revelation Man
Again, I think your're conflating some of the details of two separate visions, one in Dan 7 and the other in Rev 13-17. The vision in Dan 7 describes the 4th Beast as the entity from which the "Little Horn" comes. So the Antichrist comes from a Pagan Empire, which I believe represents the ancient Roman Empire and the 10 nations evolving out of that Kingdom.Originally Posted by Revelation Man
But the Revelation depicts a slightly different "Beast" after the Antichrist has already evolved out of it. In Rev 13 the Antichrist has already followed the "7 Heads." They are already 7 Kingdoms by this time, as depicted in Rev 12. And they are already 10 nations, as depicted in Rev 13-17. At this point the Antichrist is so associated with his Empire that they are both referred to as a "Beast." The emphasis appears to be on the *man,* with his empire being his seat of power. In Dan 7 the emphasis was more on the empire, out of which the *man* would come.
But you haven't answered the question. You said that the Beasts of Dan 7 and Rev 13-17 can only exist in relation to Israel. However, you haven't established anything more than what Daniel and Revelation says, that God's "holy people" are being persecuted by the Antichrist. This could mean Israel or the Church, or even a combination of them. To me, "holy people" signifies Israel in the OT era and the Church in the NT era. The Church does include Israel among its many national members. But in the NT era Israel is no longer considered "holy," with the exception of a small remnant of Israelis who are Christians. So this is talking, I believe, about the Church. When Daniel saw his vision his understanding of the "holy people" was Israelis who had faith in God and who obeyed God. But since Daniel saw this vision of the future representing the NT era then the "holy people" had to represent the Church.
So no, the 4th Beast, if it is to be viewed as Rome, does not require the existence of Israel, in terms of its being a nation in the Holy Land. Israel has continued to exist only in the form of a scattered people up until the 20th century. This 4th Beast of Dan 7 was supposed to continue up until the end of the age when it is "thrown into the fire." And, in fact, the Roman imperial tradition has continued all through the NT age and up until the present day. That's in essence what "Western Imperialism" represents--the old Roman Imperial tradition. And I expect that fairly soon the Antichrist will emerge and take control of 10 major Western nations.