Replies

MacArthur is good on some things, but in this instance he just gives us the old dispensational spin on Daniel, etc. Like most dispensationalists, he completely ignores historical interpretations as if no one ever tried to understand these verses before CI Scofield and the folks at Dallas Seminary. He conclusions are based largely on raw assumptions forced onto the text by his hermeneutical framework. E.g., "According to Daniel 2:40-43, there will be a revival of the Roman Empire, ..."

"And the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others." (Dan. 2:40)

There is no such "revival" pictured at all in Daniel. MacArthur sees a "revival" because of his hermeneutical bias regarding the end times. In reality Daniel only sees the one and only, original Roman Empire. It followed on the Greek, etc empires. It has passed into history, and now the Kingdom of Christ is being established throughout the world. There will be no revival. That is the plain reading of Daniel 2.