STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10

Table of Contents

Lesson # Page #

1. Notable Dates and Events Related to Daniel 3

2. Daniel’s Central Theme 7
3. Daniels Little Book 19
4. Notes on Revelation 10 27
5. The Historical Chapters of Daniel 37
6. Notes on Daniel 1 45
7. Notes on Daniel 2 55
8. Notes on Daniel 3 65
9. Notes on Daniel 4 83
10. Notes on Daniel 5 93
11. Daniel 5 as the Background to Revelation 16 and 17 103
12. Notes on Daniel 6 113
13. Notes on Daniel 7 119
14. The Jewish View of Tradition 211
15. A Case Study: Mark 7:1-13 219
16. Jesus and Theological Conflict 227
17. The Roman Catholic View of Tradition - Part 1 235
18. The Roman Catholic View of Tradition - Part 2 245
19. Sabbath Controversies and Tradition 255
20. Dies Domini The Horn that Attempted to Change God’s Law 265
21. Notes on Daniel 8 293
22. Notes on Daniel 9 325
23. Notes on Daniel 10 359

Contact Secrets Unsealed 371

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 2 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #1 – NOTABLE DATES AND EVENTS

RELATED TO DANIEL

 1445 BC: Israel enters a covenant relationship with God at Mt. Sinai (Exodus 19:5, 6).
 1405 BC: Israel begins the conquest of the Promised Land after 40 years in the wilderness
(the book of Joshua).
 1000 BC: Beginning of the Hebrew Monarchy with Saul and David.
 953 BC: Temple built by Solomon is dedicated (2 Chronicles chapters 6 and 7).
 931 BC: Jeroboam causes the split of the tribes of the south (Judah) from the tribes of the
north (Israel).
 723 BC: Destruction of Samaria by the Assyrians leads to the dispersion of the Ten Tribes
of the north. The remnants of the Ten Tribes are the Samaritans of Christ’s day.
 626 BC: The call of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 25:3) begins his ministry that lasts for about 40
years.
 623 BC: Birth of Daniel (2 Chronicles 35:18; in Testimonies for the Church, Volume 4 p.
470 Ellen White affirms that Daniel was 18 when he was taken captive in 605 BC).
 621 BC: Josiah’s reformation (2 Chronicles 35:18; Testimonies for the Church, Volume 4
p. 570) Huldah the prophetess leads Israel in a great reformation when the book of the
law is discovered in the temple (2 Kings 22:14-20). Daniel grew up during this reformation.
 612 BC: Babylon conquers Nineveh, the capital of the waning Assyrian Empire (predicted
by the prophecy of Nahum).
 605 BC: Daniel and his friends are taken captive to Babylon by King Nebuchadnezzar
(Daniel 1).
 605-536 BC: Jeremiah’s prophecy of the 70-year captivity begins and ends (Jeremiah
25:11, 12). The book of Lamentations was sung by the Hebrew captives on the way to
Babylon and Psalm 137 was sung by them while in Babylon.
 597 BC (March 15): After Judah rebelled and sided with Egypt, Nebuchadnezzar took
Jerusalem for a second time and Ezekiel was taken captive to Babylon.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 3 of 369

 588-586 BC: Jerusalem was besieged and destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (described in 2
Chronicles 36:15-21).
 539 BC: The fall of Babylon (prophesied in Jeremiah 50 and 51 and Isaiah 47 and described
in Daniel 5).
 536 BC: Cyrus issues the decree to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. The seventy-year
captivity comes to an end (605-536 BC).
 535-520 BC: Rebuilding of the temple is suspended due to opposition by the Samaritans.
 520-515 BC: The temple rebuilt and finished (described in the books of Haggai and
Zechariah).
 483 BC: The story of Esther.
 457 BC: The decree of King Artaxerxes Longanimus marks the beginning of the seventy
weeks and allows the Jews to reestablish its civil and religious institutions.
 408 BC: The walls of Jerusalem rebuilt and finished by Nehemiah in troublous times (the
book of Nehemiah).
 425 BC: Malachi was the last prophet of the Old Testament but the promise of Elijah to
come closes the Old Testament period with a note of hope (Malachi 4:4, 5).
 331 BC: The kingdom of Persia falls and the kingdom of Greece takes its place in history.
 168 BC: The kingdom of Greece falls and the Iron Empire of Rome begins its rule.
 27 AD (spring and fall): John the Baptist prepares the way in the spring for the Messiah’s
anointing in the fall.
 31 AD: Messiah is crucified on the 14th day of Nissan at 3 o’clock in the afternoon as the
Passover Lamb (Exodus 12:5, 6; Leviticus 23:5; 1 Corinthians 5:7, 8).
 31 AD: Messiah rests in the tomb on the 15th of Nissan (on the Seventh-day Sabbath as
the Unleavened Bread and the Manna; Leviticus 23:6-8; Acts 2:25-32).
 31 AD: Messiah resurrects on the 16th of Nissan and presents Himself as the first-fruits to
His Father at 9 o’clock in the morning (Leviticus 23:9-14; 1 Corinthians 15:23; Acts 2:15).
 31 AD: (forty days after the resurrection): Jesus ascends to heaven (Acts 1:9-11).
 31 AD: (ten days before Pentecost) Jesus is invested as High Priest and receives the
promise of the Spirit to pour out upon His disciples. Meanwhile the disciples prepare to
receive the Spirit in the Upper Room (Acts 1; Revelation 4; Leviticus 8; Psalm 133).
 34 AD: The stoning of Stephen marks the close of probation for the Jewish theocracy (Acts
7).
 70 AD: Jerusalem destroyed by the Roman Armies under General Titus (Daniel 9:26, 27;
Luke 19:41-44; Matthew 24:15; Matthew 22:7).
 476 AD: The final fall of the Roman Empire and the beginning of ‘divided Rome’ (Daniel
2:41-43).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 4 of 369

 508 AD: Clovis King of the Franks lends the help of the civil power to the papacy for the
first time. Beginning of the 1290 and 1335 days/years (Daniel 12:11, 12; 11:31).
 538 AD: The beginning of the 1260 days/years and the dominion of papal Rome (Daniel
7:25; Revelation 12:14; 13:5).
 1798 AD: The end of the 1260 and the 1290 years marks the conclusion of the first stage
of papal dominion.
 1843 AD: The end of the 1335 days/years (Daniel 12:12).
 1844 AD: The beginning of the investigative judgment in heaven in fulfillment of the
prophecy of the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14.
 Date Unknown: Close of human probation (Daniel 12:1).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 5 of 369

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 6 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #2 – DANIEL’S CENTRAL THEME

Ellen White on the Central Theme of Daniel

“In the annals of human history the growth of nations, the rise and fall of empires, appear as
dependent on the will and prowess of man. The shaping of events seems, to a great degree, to be
determined by his power, ambition, or caprice. But in the word of God the curtain is drawn aside,
and we behold, behind, above, and through all the play and counterplay of human interests and
power and passions, the agencies of the all-merciful One, silently, patiently working out the
counsels of His own will.” Education, p. 173

Three Key Phrases

Dan 2:20-21: Three key phrases reveal the central theme of the book of Daniel:

“Daniel answered and said: "Blessed be the name of God forever and ever, for wisdom and might
are His. And He [1] changes the times and the seasons; He [2] removes kings and raises up kings;
He [3] gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those who have understanding.”

The idea of the ‘change’ of times is found in some very interesting places in the book of Daniel.
The word basically means that God is in charge of the historical events of nations and individual
persons. In Daniel 3:28 we are told that the three young Hebrews changed the king’s word
(actually God did). In Daniel 6:8, 17 we are told that the law of the Medes and Persians could not
be changed but God changed and overturned it. In Daniel 4, when the king was looking forward
to many years of prosperity, God changed his plans and made seven times pass over him before
he recovered his sanity. Daniel 7:25 uses the same word to describe the little horn thinking that
it could control times. On an individual level the Psalmist exclaimed to God: “My times are in your
hand” (Psalm 31:15).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 7 of 369

Central Theme in Daniel 1

Daniel 1:1, 2: The two sides in the conflict are introduced

 Two kings: Jehoiakim versus Nebuchadnezzar

 Two gods: Yahweh versus Marduk
 Two cities: Babylon versus Jerusalem
 Two temples: the temple of God versus the temple of Marduk
 Two peoples: The Hebrews versus the Babylonians
 On the surface, Nebuchadnezzar appeared to have the upper hand. He and his god
appeared to be more powerful than Jehoiakim and His God. But Daniel 1:1, 2 removes
the veil and shows that Nebuchadnezzar prevailed only because God allowed it. It was
necessary that Daniel end up in Babylon because God had a very important work for him
there:

Daniel 1:1,2: “In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of
Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it. 2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his
hand, with some of the articles of the house of God, which he carried into the land of Shinar to the
house of his god; and he brought the articles into the treasure house of his god.”

Change of Diet

Daniel 1:5: The king appoints the diet

The king appeared to have control by appointing the diet of Daniel and his friends. This diet
differed radically from the original diet that God had appointed in Eden:

Daniel 1:5: “And the king appointed for them a daily provision of the king's delicacies and of the
wine which he drank, and three years of training for them, so that at the end of that time they
might serve before the king.”

The king attempted to control the diet of Daniel and his friends in this way exhibiting his
sovereignty over them. But then Daniel and his friends refused to eat his rich food and drink his
wine. This refusal on the part of Daniel and his friends reveals that Nebuchadnezzar was not in
full control.

Daniel 1:8: “But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of
the king's delicacies, nor with the wine which he drank.”

Change of Names

Daniel 1:7: The king changed the names of the Hebrew worthies. In the Bible the name is a
revelation of the person’s character:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 8 of 369

Daniel 1:7: “To them the chief of the eunuchs gave names: he gave Daniel the name Belteshazzar;
to Hananiah, Shadrach; to Mishael, Meshach; and to Azariah, Abed-Nego.”

The king appeared to be in control because he changed the names of Daniel and his friends. That
the change had an intentional purpose is seen in Daniel 4:8 where Nebuchadnezzar brags that
he changed Daniel’s name to Belteshazzar to honor his gods rather than the God of Daniel.

Daniel 5:12 Although the eunuch changed the names he did so because the king instructed him
to do so:

Daniel 5:12: “Inasmuch as an excellent spirit, knowledge, understanding, interpreting dreams,

solving riddles, and explaining enigmas were found in this Daniel, whom the king named
Belteshazzar, now let Daniel be called, and he will give the interpretation."

Daniel 4:8: “But at last Daniel came before me (his name is Belteshazzar according to the name
of my god).”

Nebuchadnezzar’s desire to control is revealed in the rest of the book by the fact that the king
always refers to the Hebrew worthies by their Babylonian names. But God and the Hebrew
worthies employ their Hebrew names.

Change of Education

The king’s desire to exhibit his control is also revealed by the fact that he had the Hebrew
worthies enrolled in the educational system of Babylon. He wanted to change their religion and
world view by putting them into the school of Babylon with the wise men; but the young men
were not buying! Daniel and his friends never used the divination methods of the wise men. In
fact, they were hated by the wise men because of their religious principles.

Daniel and his friends made up their minds that they would be faithful to the God of their fathers
and God rewarded them by giving them true wisdom from heaven.

Daniel 1:17: “As for these four young men, God gave them knowledge and skill in all literature
and wisdom; and Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams.”

The result of their faithfulness was apparent: Daniel and his friends were ten times better than
all the wise men which ate Babylon’s food and studied in the Babylon’s school. Because of their
faithfulness God brought them to prominence in the kingdom.

Central Theme in Daniel 2

God’s control of history is revealed in several details in the story of Daniel 2.

First of all, according to Daniel 2:29, God was able to read the king’s thoughts when he went to
bed:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 9 of 369

Daniel 2:29: “Thoughts came to your mind while on your bed about what would come to pass
after this.”

Because God knew what the king was thinking, He gave him a dream to reveal what he wanted
to know.

God then gave the king amnesia. The purpose of the amnesia was to unmask the wise men and
reveal before the world that the religion of Babylon was bankrupt and that the religion of Daniel
was superior. Daniel did not use the forbidden methods of the wise men. His only method was
prayer to God. He did not practice what he was taught in the school of Babylon.

Now that Satan’s instruments had been unmasked, Satan took advantage of the situation by
acting upon the king’s mind to destroy all the wise men and among these were Daniel and his
friends. Obviously Satan had seen in these young men a potential future problem and he was
going to nip the problem in the bud.

God showed that He was in control by revealing the dream to Daniel that He had veiled from the
king’s memory. God gave Daniel wisdom to know the dream and its meaning.

As Daniel went before the king to tell him the dream and its meaning, he clearly told the king that
the course of history is controlled by God:

Daniel 2:37-38: “You, O king, are a king of kings. For the God of heaven has given you a kingdom,
power, strength, and glory; 38 and wherever the children of men dwell, or the beasts of the field
and the birds of the heaven, He has given them into your hand, and has made you ruler over
them all — you are this head of gold.”

According to Daniel’s explanation, Nebuchadnezzar did not come to the kingdom because of his
superior intelligence or mightier weapons. He became king because God determined it that way.

God then showed His sovereignty over human history by revealing how it would flow from
Daniel’s day until the end of time. Only the One who knows the future in advance can mold the
course of history to fulfill his plan. Daniel clearly showed the king that God will have the last
word.

Satan intended to have Daniel and his friends killed along with the wise men but instead, God
brought them to prominence in the kingdom where they could be in close contact with the king.

The Central Theme in Daniel 3

God had delineated in Daniel 2 the sequence of kingdoms that would arise between the days of
Nebuchadnezzar and the second coming of Jesus. Nebuchadnezzar did not like the scenario that
God had presented and he attempted to change God’s prophetic scenario—the times. The king
was saying: ‘History will unfold according to my scenario. I am in control.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 10 of 369

There are several links between Daniel 2 and 3:

 The word “gold” in Daniel 2 and 3 links the chapters.

 The word “image” is identical in both chapters.
 The expression “I have set up” is repeatedly used in the chapter (verses 1, 2, 3 [2 times],
5, 7, 12, 14, 15, 18).
 Remember that in Daniel 2 God had stated that He was going to “set up” his eternal and
indestructible kingdom (3:1, 2, 3, 7, 12, 14, 15 and 18) so the king set up an image to
announce that his kingdom would be eternal and indestructible.

All the power and control appear to be in the king’s hand as the story in Daniel 3 unfolds. The
king raises the image in defiance of God’s perspective of history. He commands everyone to
worship the image. All nations, tongues and peoples bow to the king’s command. He utters a
death decree against anyone who fails to recognize his authority. He heats the furnace seven
times hotter than ever before. He has the young men thrown into the furnace.

But the story clearly shows that the power and control of the king are limited. While the whole
world follows the order of the king, there is a small remnant of three who contested his
supremacy—they were the allies of the God of heaven. The king’s power and authority was not
absolute. In fact, it is limited because he could not force the young men to worship his image.
They refused to recognize the king’s perspective of human history. They were loyal to the God of
heaven.

The king defiantly claimed to be greater than the God of the Hebrews when he said to them:

Daniel 3:15 (NIV): “…What God shall be able to deliver you from my hand?”

The three young men answered the king:

Daniel 3:16, 17: “…O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. 17 If that is
the case, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will
deliver us from your hand, O king.”

Nebuchadnezzar then exercised his power and control by heating the furnace seven times hotter
and throwing the three young men into the furnace. But God spoke the last word. Christ Himself
interrupted and overturned the king’s power and authority by coming personally into the
furnace to deliver His remnant. A key word that appears at critical junctures in the chapter is the
word ‘deliver’. In fact, we will discover that this word is found only in Daniel 3, 6 and 11-12. God
is the one who changes the evil decrees of human kings and delivers his people from certain
death.

At the end of the chapter the king is forced to admit that the God of Daniel is above all gods. He
is not yet a believer in the one and only God but he is well on his way to becoming a humble child
of the heavenly king.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 11 of 369

The Central Theme in Daniel 4

At the beginning of chapter 4 King Nebuchadnezzar publicly proclaimed that God is in control of
human affairs (Daniel 4:3). But at this point the king perceived God as a great wonder worker,
not as a personal God who cares about individuals in the flow of history.

Daniel 4:2-3: “I thought it good to declare the signs and wonders that the Most High God hath
wrought for me. 3How great are his signs and how mighty his wonders! His kingdom is an
everlasting kingdom and his dominion is from generation to generation.”

God gave the king the dream of the tree. As a result, the king was disturbed and wished to know
the meaning. Amazingly, the king called the same charlatans who had failed him in chapter 2 (4:4
7) and whose scheme against the three Hebrew worthies had been brought to nought in chapter
3. This indicates that the king had not yet totally shed his pagan view of God.

According to Daniel 4:13-17 God had given the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar and He could take
it away from him whenever He pleased:

Daniel 4:13-17: "I saw in the visions of my head while on my bed, and there was a watcher, a
holy one, coming down from heaven. 14 He cried aloud and said thus: 'Chop down the tree and cut
off its branches, strip off its leaves and scatter its fruit. Let the beasts get out from under it, and
the birds from its branches. 15 Nevertheless leave the stump and roots in the earth, bound with a
band of iron and bronze, in the tender grass of the field. Let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and
let him graze with the beasts on the grass of the earth. 16 Let his heart be changed from that of a
man, let him be given the heart of a beast, and let seven times pass over him. 17 'This decision is
by the decree of the watchers, and the sentence by the word of the holy ones, in order that the
living may know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, gives it to whomever He will,
and sets over it the lowest of men.'”

The king then admitted that the Spirit of the holy God was in Daniel and that God had revealed
dreams to Daniel. (Daniel 4:18)

When Daniel provided the interpretation to the dream in verses 24-27, he explained that the
watchers would remove him from the throne and after his repentance they would restore him
to it:

Daniel 4:24---27: “. . . this is the interpretation, O king, and this is the decree of the Most High,
which has come upon my lord the king: 25 They shall drive you from men, your dwelling shall be
with the beasts of the field, and they shall make you eat grass like oxen. They shall wet you with
the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass over you, till you know that the Most High rules
in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomever He chooses. 26 "And inasmuch as they gave the
command to leave the stump and roots of the tree, your kingdom shall be assured to you, after
you come to know that Heaven rules. 27 Therefore, O king, let my advice be acceptable to you;
break off your sins by being righteous, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the poor. Perhaps
there may be a lengthening of your prosperity."

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 12 of 369

About a year after his dream, the king looked upon the greatness of Babylon and came to the
conclusion that it was built because of his greatness and power and for the honor of his majesty.

Daniel 4:29, 30: “At the end of the twelve months he was walking about the royal palace of
Babylon. 30 The king spoke, saying, "Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for a royal dwelling
by my mighty power and for the honor of my majesty?"

Daniel 4:31-33: God is doing this through the instrumentality of the watchers who are His
messengers. In Daniel 4:31-33 we find a consistent use of passive verbs. The king’s insanity is
due to what God through the watchers does to him. While the king thought that he was in full
control of his destiny and looked forward to many years of prosperity, the God who controls the
times withdrew his reasoning powers for seven years.

Daniel 4:31-33: “While the word was still in the king's mouth, a voice fell from heaven: "King
Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: the kingdom has departed from you! 32 And they shall drive
you from men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. They shall make you eat
grass like oxen; and seven times shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules in
the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomever He chooses." 33 That very hour the word was
fulfilled concerning Nebuchadnezzar; he was driven from men and ate grass like oxen; his body
was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair had grown like eagles' feathers and his nails like birds'
claws.”

Ellen White comments:

“The jewel of the mind, that which elevates man above the beasts, he no longer retained. The
scepter is no longer held in the hand of a proud and powerful monarch. The mighty ruler is a
maniac. He now herds with the cattle to eat as they eat. He is a companion of the beasts of the
field. The brow that once wore a coronet is disfigured by the absence of reason and intellect.”
Testimonies for the Church, Volume 8 p. 127

It is nothing short of miraculous that the king survived in this condition for seven years. In
antiquity, whenever a king showed the least weakness there were always those who wanted to
knock him off and usurp the throne. But God preserved it secure for him while he was ‘out of it’.
Thus, God placed him on the throne, God removed him from the throne and God restored him
to it once more.

Daniel 4:34-37 reveals that the king learned the lesson that God wished to teach him. When he
looked at himself he lost his sanity but when he looked up to God in heaven he regained it:

Daniel 4:34-37: “And at the end of the time I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my
understanding returned to me; and I blessed the Most High and praised and honored Him who
lives forever: For His dominion is an everlasting dominion, and His kingdom is from generation to
generation. 35 All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His
will in the army of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His hand
or say to Him: "What have You done?" 36 At the same time my reason returned to me, and for
the glory of my kingdom, my honor and splendor returned to me. My counselors and nobles

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 13 of 369

resorted to me, I was restored to my kingdom, and excellent majesty was added to me. 37 Now I,
Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, all of whose works are truth,
and His ways justice. And those who walk in pride He is able to abase.”

The Central Theme in Daniel 5

Daniel 5 describes a great banquet that King Belshazzar organized for all his nobles. Why was
King Belshazzar having a party when he knew that the Medes and Persians had the city
surrounded at that very moment? The reason is that he was certain that the city was invincible.
He was sure that Babylon, with its massive walls and protecting river would never fall!!

Daniel 5:5: God, through a watcher wrote on the wall decreeing the close of probation for
Babylon. God sets up kingdoms and God decrees their fall when they fail to fulfill His purpose:

Daniel 5:5: “In the same hour the fingers of a man's hand appeared and wrote opposite the
lampstand on the plaster of the wall of the king's palace; and the king saw the part of the hand
that wrote.”

The watchers are heavenly angels through whom God fulfills His purpose on earth. Ellen White
explains that they watch and write down the actions of human beings (Christ’s Object Lessons,
p. 175), they watch heaven’s gates (Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 373), they see the earth filled
with corruption and violence (Christian Service, p. 53) they shield the righteous from the power
of the wicked one (The Great Controversy, p. 512, 513), our prayers find access to the Father in
heaven through the watchers (In Heavenly Places, p. 84) and guardian angels are called watchers
(My Life Today, p. 302).

Daniel 5:7-8: The wise men could not understand the meaning of the writing on the wall. They
could read the words (see my notes on Daniel 5) but they did not understand what they meant.
Only the God who had written on the wall could reveal what the words meant and Daniel was
needed to interpret the writing:

Daniel 5:7, 8: “The king cried aloud to bring in the astrologers, the Chaldeans, and the
soothsayers. The king spoke, saying to the wise men of Babylon, "Whoever reads this writing, and
tells me its interpretation shall be clothed with purple and have a chain of gold around his neck;
and he shall be the third ruler in the kingdom." 8 Now all the king's wise men came, but they could
not read the writing, or make known to the king its interpretation.”

Daniel 5:12: According to the queen mother what the wise men could not do, Daniel could
because God had given him wisdom:

Daniel 5:12: “Inasmuch as an excellent spirit, knowledge, understanding, interpreting dreams,

solving riddles, and explaining enigmas were found in this Daniel, whom the king named
Belteshazzar, now let Daniel be called, and he will give the interpretation."

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 14 of 369

Daniel made it clear to the king that the God of heaven had given him the kingdom:

Daniel 5:18: “O king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father a kingdom and
majesty, glory and honor”

In Daniel 5:19-21 we once more encounter a series of passive verbs that reveal that historical
events are being guided and determined by an invisible hand:

Daniel 5:19-21: “And because of the majesty that He gave him, all peoples, nations, and
languages trembled and feared before him. Whomever he wished, he executed; whomever he
wished, he kept alive; whomever he wished, he set up; and whomever he wished, he put down. 20
But when his heart was lifted up, and his spirit was hardened in pride, he was deposed from his
kingly throne, and they took his glory from him. 21 Then he was driven from the sons of men, his
heart was made like the beasts, and his dwelling was with the wild donkeys. They fed him with
grass like oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till he knew that the Most High
God rules in the kingdom of men, and appoints over it whomever He chooses.”

In Daniel 5:23, the prophet informed the king that God was the source of his very breath and
that He owned all his ways:

Daniel 5:23: “. . . and the God who holds your breath in His hand and owns all your ways, you
have not glorified.”

Daniel 5:24: The words written on the wall by a heavenly Watcher pronounced the doom of
Babylon. Notice that God’s hand did not write on the wall. God sent the hand to write on the
wall:

Daniel 5:24: “Then the fingers of the hand were sent from Him, and this writing was written.”

Daniel 5:26-28: God took away Belshazzar’s kingdom and gave it to the Medes and Persians.
Once again one is struck by use of the passive verbs. There is someone behind the scenes who
is choreographing history.

Daniel 5:26-28: “This is the interpretation of each word. Mene: God has numbered your kingdom,
and finished it; 27 Tekel: You have been weighed in the balances, and found wanting; 28 Peres:
Your kingdom has been divided, and given to the Medes and Persians."

Daniel 5:30-31: God’s decree was fulfilled on that very night. God removed the king from the
throne and gave the kingdom to the Medes and Persians:

Daniel 5:30-31; “That very night Belshazzar, king of the Chaldeans, was slain. 31 And Darius the
Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old. “

The Central Theme in Daniel 6

In this chapter we find a group of evil princes who are envious of Daniel and wish to have him
killed. The princes believed that they were in control because the decrees of the Medes and

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 15 of 369

Persians could not be changed. The king exhibited his power and authority by issuing a decree.
But after giving the decree he was bound by it and could not deliver Daniel. It was seen that the
king’s power and authority were limited because he was bound by his own law (Daniel 6:7, 8).
His power was not absolute. The irrevocable decree that was supposed to reveal the power of
the king actually bound him and made him a slave of circumstances.

All the power seemed to be in the hands of Daniel’s enemies. By all appearances, the prophet
would become cat food. But Daniel prayed to his God because he knew that He was in control.
He was not afraid of the lions because he knew that God created them and therefore He could
deliver him from them (Daniel 6:10).

The king who had exercised his power in giving the law was now powerless to deliver Daniel. The
king realized that he was not in control at all. If Daniel was going to be delivered a king greater
than he would have to do it. The king did all in his power to deliver Daniel but was not able to do
it Daniel 6:14). The wise men reminded the king that his decree could not be changed Daniel
6:15). When the king lost all hope of helping Daniel he said to the prophet: “Your God, whom you
serve continually, He will deliver you.” (Daniel 6:16) The word ‘changed’ in verses 14-17 is
significant. This is the same word that is used in Daniel 3:28 where Nebuchadnezzar confessed
that the God of heaven changed his plans. It is the same word that is used in Daniel 7:25 where
the little horn attempted to take control of the times and the seasons. It is the same word that is
found in Daniel 2:21 where we are told that God is in control of the times and the seasons (see
also Acts 1:7). The king’s counselors boasted that the decree could not be changed but the God
of Daniel changed their evil plans and delivered his prophet. God then closed the mouths of the
lions that He had created. All night the lions behaved as little kitty cats! (Daniel 6:18-22) while
the king worried and fretted.

Early in the morning the king came to the lion’s den and cried out: ‘Has the God whom you serve
continually been able to deliver you?’ the answer was immediate: ‘Yes, God has delivered me
because I was found innocent before him and I have done you no wrong.’

God then removed His control over the lions and they devoured the princes who had planned
the evil plot. (Daniel 6:24).

At the conclusion of chapter 6 we find a beautiful confession of the king extolling the God of
Daniel:

Daniel 6:26-27: “I make a decree that in every dominion of my kingdom men must tremble and
fear before the God of Daniel. For He is the living God, and steadfast forever; His kingdom is the
one which shall not be destroyed, and His dominion shall endure to the end. 27 He delivers and
rescues, and He works signs and wonders in heaven and on earth, who has delivered Daniel from
the power of the lions.”

The Central Theme in Daniel 7

This chapter follows the same sequence as Daniel 2. God is in control of history because He can
reveal how it will transpire: Basically God is saying: “This is the way that history will unfold.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 16 of 369

Daniel 7 is full of passive verbs that reveal that there is a power behind the curtain of history that
is guiding human affairs:

Daniel 7:4: The lion

“The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings. I watched till its wings were plucked off; and it
was lifted up from the earth and made to stand on two feet like a man, and a man's heart was
given to it.”

Daniel 7:5: The bear

"And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear. It was raised up on one side, and had three
ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And they [presumably the watchers] said thus to it: 'Arise,
devour much flesh!'

Daniel 7:6: The leopard

"After this I looked, and there was another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a
bird. The beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it.”

Daniel 7:7: The dragon beast

"After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly
strong. It had huge iron teeth; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue
with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns.”

Daniel 7:25: The little horn

“He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, shall persecute the saints of the Most
High, and shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand for a
time and times and half a time.”

The little horn appeared to be in control. It thought it could change the times and the law, it
blasphemed God, it persecuted the saints and things seemed to go well for it because we are told
that it prospered. This is the reason why the martyrs cry out for justice in Revelation 6:9-11. But
God puts a time limit on the work of the little horn. God decrees that it will only be able to
exercise control for a time, and times and the dividing of time.

Three times in Daniel 7 we are told that after the little horn does its work, the court will sit in
heaven and God will take dominion away from the little horn and give it to the saints of the Most
High (Daniel 7:9, 10, 13, 14; Daniel 7:21, 22; Daniel 7:25-27). Thus the evil work of the little horn
on earth will be judged in the heavenly court after which the little horn will be destroyed and the
kingdom will be given to the saints.

Notice the passive voice of the verbs: Jesus was brought by the angels before the Ancient of Days
and then the kingdom was given to Jesus (Daniel 7:14), “judgment was made in favor of the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 17 of 369

saints” (Daniel 7:22). The watchers took away the little horn’s dominion and then the kingdom
shall be given to the saints of the Most High.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 18 of 369

 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #3 – DANIEL’S LITTLE BOOK

Two Books in one

A careful examination of the book of Daniel reveals that it is composed of two books within one
book. One is Daniel 1-7 and the other is Daniel 8-12.

Briefly review the chiastic structure of Daniel 1-7.

Review Daniel 7 with the emphasis on the succession of powers:

 Babylon
 Medo-Persia
 Greece
 Roman Empire
 Roman Empire divided
 Ecclesiastical Rome (538-1798)

Daniel 7:9, 10, 13, 14: After all of these powers have ruled, the next event in the sequence is a
judgment that takes place in heaven. The idea that the judgment would take place in two stages
(investigative in heaven and executive on earth) was not understood before the time of the end.

Daniel 7:9, 10, 13, 14: "I watched till thrones were put in place and the Ancient of Days was
seated; His garment was white as snow and the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne
was a fiery flame, its wheels a burning fire; 10 A fiery stream issued [the angelic hosts] and came
forth from before Him. A thousand thousands ministered to Him; ten thousand times ten thousand
stood before Him. The court was seated and the books were opened… 13 "I was watching in the
night visions and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came
to the Ancient of Days and they [the angels] brought Him near before Him. 14 Then to Him was
given dominion and glory and a kingdom that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve
Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away and His kingdom the
one which shall not be destroyed.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 19 of 369

Daniel 7 clearly reveals that the judgment is composed of two stages: Investigative in heaven
and executive on earth.

The Book that was sealed

Daniel 12:4:

"But you, Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book until [there is a time limit to its being
sealed] the time of the end; [but at the time of the end] many shall run to and fro, and knowledge
[of the contents of the book that was sealed] shall increase."

The book which was sealed and could not be understood until the time of the end (Daniel 12:4,
9) is not the ENTIRE book of Daniel but rather the portion that has to do with the 2300 day
prophecy and the judgment hour message.

Six Reasons why the Little Book is Daniel 8-12

Reason #1:

The introduction to the book of Daniel is in Hebrew. But beginning in chapter 2 and until the end
of chapter 7 the language shifts to Aramaic. Then in chapters 8-12 the language shifts again to
Hebrew. Thus, the first half of Daniel is in one language and the other half is in another language.
This indicates that the book of Daniel is divided into two parts.

Reason #2:

There is evidence that Daniel, chapters 1-7, was almost entirely understood long before the
“time of the end”, Notice the words of the church father Hippolytus who wrote in the third
century A. D.

“In speaking of a ‘lioness from the sea’, he [Daniel] meant the rising of the kingdom of Babylon
and that this was the ‘golden head of the image’ . . . Then after the lioness he sees a second beast,
‘like a bear’, which signified the Persians. For after the Babylonians the Persians obtain the power.
And in saying that ‘it had three ribs in its mouth’, he pointed to the three nations, Persians, Medes,
and Babylonians, which were expressed in the image by the silver after the gold. Then comes the
third beast, ‘a leopard’, which means the Greeks; for after the Persians,

Alexander of Macedon had the power, when Darius was overthrown, which was also indicated by
the brass in the image. And in saying that the beast ‘had four wings of a fowl, and four heads’, he
showed most clearly how the kingdom of Alexander was parted into four divisions. For in
speaking of four heads, he meant the four kings that arose out of it. For Alexander, when dying,
divided his kingdom into four parts. Then he says, ‘the fourth beast (was) dreadful and terrible: it
had iron teeth, and claws of brass’. Who, then, are meant by this but the Romans, whose
kingdom, the kingdom that still stands, is expressed by the iron? ‘For’, says he, ‘its legs are of
iron.’” L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, volume 1, p. 272

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 20 of 369

He also has something to say about the identity of the little horn and the judgment:

“Let us look at what is before us more carefully, and scan it, as it were, with open eye. The ‘golden
head of the image’ is identical with the ‘lioness’, by which the Babylonians were represented.
‘The golden shoulders and arms of silver’ are the same with the ‘bear’, by which the Persians and
Medes are meant. ‘The belly and thighs of brass’ are the ‘leopard’, by which the Greeks who ruled
from Alexander onwards are intended. The ‘legs of iron’ are the ‘dreadful and terrible beast’, by
which the Romans who hold the empire now are meant. The ‘toes of clay and iron’ are the ‘ten
horns’ which are to be. The ‘one other little horn springing up in their midst is the ‘antichrist’. The
stone that ‘smites the image and breaks it in pieces’, and that filled the whole earth, is Christ,
who comes from heaven and brings judgment on the world.” L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of
our Fathers, volume 1, p. 272

It will be noticed that Hippolytus understood everything about Daniel 7 except the investigative
pre-Advent judgment. For him the judgment would take place when Jesus came from heaven to
earth to establish His everlasting kingdom.

Notably, even some portions of Daniel 8-12 that were fulfilled before the time of the end could
be understood before that time.

Certainly the meaning of the Ram and the he-goat of Daniel 8 were understood before the time
of the end as was the prophecy of the seventy weeks. Much of the earlier portions of Daniel 11
could be understood before the time of the end. In fact, the pagan philosopher, Porphyry argued
against the early church fathers that the first half of Daniel 11 described so precisely Greek and
Roman history that it had to have been written ex-eventu in the second century but panned off
as the work of the prophet Daniel in the sixth century.

But there is one aspect of Daniel 8-12 that could not be understood by anyone until the time of
the end. The message concerning the 2300 days and the judgment were sealed until the time of
the end.

Reason #3:

Ellen White explicitly states more than once that the book which was sealed until the time of the
end was not the entirety of the book of Daniel but rather the PORTION or PART of the book (the
portion which is in Hebrew) that has to do with the judgment as depicted in the 2300 day
prophecy.

“In the Revelation all the books of the Bible meet and end. Here is the complement of the book of
Daniel. One is a prophecy; the other a revelation. The book that was sealed is not the Revelation,
but that portion of the prophecy of Daniel relating to the last days. The angel commanded, "But
thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end." Daniel 12:4.”
Acts of the Apostles, p. 585

“The message of salvation has been preached in all ages; but this message [the first angel’s
message] is a part of the gospel which could be proclaimed only in the last days, for only then
would it be true that the hour of judgment had come. The prophecies present a succession of

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 21 of 369

events leading down to the opening of the judgment. This is especially true of the book of Daniel.
But that part of his prophecy which related to the last days, Daniel was bidden to close up and
seal "to the time of the end." Not till we reach this time could a message concerning the judgment
be proclaimed, based on the fulfillment of these prophecies. But at the time of the end, says the
prophet, "many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." Daniel 12:4.” The Great
Controversy, p. 355

“The words of the angel to Daniel relating to the last days were to be understood in the time of
the end. At that time, "many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased."…10 "The
wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall
understand." Daniel 12:4, 10 The Desire of Ages, p. 234

“The unsealing of the little book was the message in relation to time.” Manuscript Releases,
volume 1, p. 99

“Honored by men with the responsibilities of state and with the secrets of kingdoms bearing
universal sway, Daniel was honored by God as His ambassador, and was given many revelations
of the mysteries of ages to come. His wonderful prophecies, as recorded by him in chapters 7 to
12 of the book bearing his name, were not fully understood even by the prophet himself; but
before his life labors closed, he was given the blessed assurance that "at the end of the days"--in
the closing period of this world's history--he would again be permitted to stand in his lot and
place. It was not given him to understand all that God had revealed of the divine purpose.
…Daniel 12:4: "Shut up the words, and seal the book," he was directed concerning his prophetic
writings; these were to be sealed…4 "even to the time of the end."… 9 "Go thy way, Daniel," the
angel once more directed the faithful messenger of Jehovah; "for the words are closed up and
sealed till the time of the end”. . . . 13 “Go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and
stand in thy lot at the end of the days." Daniel 12:4, 9, 13, Prophets and Kings, p. 547

Reason #4:

The internal evidence that is found in Daniel 8-12 proves beyond any doubt that this is the little
book that was sealed until the time of the end. Let’s take these chapters, one by one to see how
their content is closely linked with the 2300 days and the judgment:

Daniel 8:

In this chapter the historical framework of the 2300-day prophecy is introduced:

 The Ram with two horns: Begins in the time of the kingdom of Medo-Persia.
 The He-goat with a notable horn: Represents the kingdom of Greece and its first king,
Alexander the Great.
 The Four horns: Represent the four divisions of Alexander’s Empire after his death.
 The Little horn (first stage): Pagan Rome first extends horizontally on earth to the south,
the east and the glorious land.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 22 of 369

  The Little horn (second stage): Papal Rome extends vertically to heaven and interferes
with Christ’s work in the heavenly sanctuary.
 This vision [chazon] will extend over a period of 2300 days/years and then the process of
cleansing the sanctuary will begin.

Four Differences

Although the prophecy of Daniel 8 is parallel to the ones in Daniel 2 and 7, there are four
differences:

 First, while in Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 the prophetic series begins with the kingdom of
Babylon (the gold and the lion) in Daniel 8 (although it is dated to the reign of Belshazzar)
there is no symbol for the kingdom of Babylon. The traditional argument given for this
difference is that the kingdom of Babylon was about to pass away. But the date given for
this chapter (550 BC) indicates that the kingdom of Babylon would not pass away for
another twelve years.
 Second, in contrast to Daniel 7, the beasts that are used in Daniel 8 are domestic
sanctuary animals. The ram was used in the daily service while the he-goat was used in
the yearly service. This strongly hints that the central theme of Daniel 8 is the daily and
yearly services of the sanctuary.
 Third, there is only one symbol in Daniel 8 for both pagan and papal Rome, a little horn.
The horn first spreads out horizontally [east, south, glorious land] and then vertically to
heaven. In other words, it first extends politically and then religiously. It is rather clear
that the introduction of another beast into Daniel 8 to represent pagan Rome would have
spoiled the symmetry of the chapter which emphasizes the two beasts of the sanctuary
service. By using only one horn for the two stages of Rome God wants us to understand
that Rome would morph from a mere political kingdom into a political/religious one. This
idea is brought out in Daniel 11:31 where ‘forces’ stand up to aid in the taking away of
the daily and the setting up of the ‘abomination of desolation’.
 Fourth, there is no reference in Daniel 8 to the establishment of Christ’s everlasting
kingdom. This is due to the fact that Daniel got sick before Gabriel was able to explain the
meaning of the cleansing of the sanctuary (Daniel 8:26, 27). This is the reason why Gabriel
came back in Daniel 9-12 to explain the things that had remained unexplained in chapter
8.

Daniel 9: Is related to the 2300-day prophecy by providing its starting point.

Daniel 8 mentions the 2300-day prophecy but does not provide a starting point. But in chapter
9 the starting point for the 2300 days is given. They will begin with the …Daniel 9:25: ‘going forth
of the command to restore and build Jerusalem.’ This decree was given in the year 457 BC by the
Persian King Artaxerxes. The seventy weeks constitute the first 490 years of the 2300-day

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 23 of 369

prophecy and those years begin during the kingdom of Persia. This is the real reason why the
kingdom of Babylon is not mentioned in Daniel 8 because the 2300 days do not begin during the
kingdom of Babylon but during the kingdom of Persia.

Daniel 10:

In order for the prophecy of the 2300 days to begin its fulfillment it was necessary for the kings
of Persia to give certain decrees for Israel to go back to their land and rebuild their temple, city,
walls and to restore a functioning Hebrew theocracy.

Satan (who is described as the prince of Persia) knew this and therefore he worked on the minds
of the Persian kings to try and prevent them from allowing Israel to return to their land.

 If Israel did not return. . .

 The temple, the city and the walls would not be rebuilt.
 A functioning theocracy would not be reestablished.
 The Seventy Week prophecy would not begin.
 The prophecy of the 2300 days could not begin to be fulfilled.
 God’s timeline would be frustrated.
 But in the end, Michael came to help Gabriel and the decrees were given right in time
for the seventy-week prophecy and the 2300 days to begin right on schedule.

When the events of Daniel 10 transpired, Cyrus had just given the decree for the Jews to return
to the land to rebuild the temple. However, there were storm clouds on the horizon. Opposition
from the Samaritans soon led King Cambyses to revoke the decree that Cyrus had given and as a
result, the work of building the temple was suspended. Later on (in the year 520 BC, Darius I had
to reaffirm the original decree by Cyrus and as a result the Jews were able to finish the temple.

Daniel 11:1-12:3:

 Now that which was begun and not finished in Daniel 8 will be completed in chapter 11.
 It is important to note that the last vision in the book of Daniel was the one in chapter 8.
Beginning with chapter 9 we have only additional explanations to the vision of Daniel 8.
Daniel 11 does not contain a new vision but rather a further explanation of the vision of
Daniel 8.
 As in Daniel 8, the explanation of Daniel 11 begins during the kingdom of Persia (not
Babylon).
 The explanation continues with Greece, its first king and the four divisions after
Alexander’s death.
 The explanation continues with pagan Rome, the power that broke the Prince of the
Covenant.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 24 of 369

  The description then moves on to papal Rome during the 1260 years, a power that spoke
great words against God, slew the saints, took away the daily and set up the abomination
of desolation.
 The chapter next takes us to the period (verses 40-45) when the King of the North (the little horn
or beast) recovers its power after being wounded (in 1798 AD). The resurrected power
overwhelms the world and puts the very existence of the remnant in jeopardy.
 Daniel 8 took us from the time of the kingdom of Persia to the end of the 2300 days in 1844 when
the judgment began, but Daniel 11 takes us all the way from Persia to the end of that judgment
and the close of probation (Daniel 12:1: the standing up of Michael).
 Finally, Daniel 12:2, 3 takes us to the time when God’s people will resurrect and inherit the
everlasting kingdom and the righteous will shine as stars forever and ever.

Daniel 12:4

The book about the 2300 days and the judgment is then sealed until the time of the end.

Daniel 12:5-13: This section of Daniel does not begin a new vision but is rather to be understood
as the epilogue of the book. These verses provide a summary review and further explanation of
the key time periods that were mentioned in Daniel 7-12.

Reason #5: The key word that links Daniel 8-12 is ‘understand’

 8:16: An order to Gabriel to help Daniel understand.

 8:17: Gabriel instructs Daniel to understand.
 8:27: Daniel did not understand.
 9:1, 2: Daniel understood the 70-year prophecy.
 9:23: Gabriel tells Daniel to understand the vision.
 10:1: Daniel understood the thing.
 10:11, 12 and 13: Gabriel comes to help Daniel understand.
 12:12: The wise shall understand.

Reason #6

 The opening of the little book in Revelation 10 is a clear reference to the moment when
the little book of Daniel 8-12 was unsealed and opened. Notably, the little book of
Revelation 10 is opened at the beginning of the sixth trumpet toward the very end of
history immediately before Jesus takes over the kingdom at the time of the seventh
trumpet (Revelation 11:15-18). The angel who came from heaven announced that time
would be no longer because the prophecy of the 2300 days had reached its fulfillment
(Revelation 10:6) and prophetic times had come to an end.
 Concerning the unsealing of the little book, Ellen White remarks:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 25 of 369

 “It was the Lion of the tribe of Judah who unsealed the book and gave to John the
revelation of what should be in these last days. Daniel stood in his lot to bear his
testimony, which was sealed until the time of the end, when the first angel's message
should be proclaimed to our world. These matters are of infinite importance in these last
days, but while "many shall be purified, and made white, and tried," "the wicked shall do
wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand." . . . The book of Daniel is unsealed
in the revelation to John, and carries us forward to the last scenes of this earth's history.
Manuscript Releases, volume 18, p. 15
 We shall find in our next study that no chapter in the Bible explains in a clearer way the
origin, message, mission and destiny of God’s end-time remnant people.
 It is no coincidence that the central message of the Millerites who preached at the
beginning of the time of the end was drawn from Daniel 8:14 and Revelation 14:6, 7.
 The eating of the little book in Revelation 10 clearly describes the judgment hour study
and preaching of the Millerite movement and its subsequent disappointment. After the
disappointment John was told to prophesy again and then he was commanded to
measure the temple. In other words, after the disappointment God’s people were called
upon to present another message from the little book of Daniel and that message had to
do with the measuring of the heavenly temple which is the investigative judgment (see
the notes on Revelation 10 that follow. For a fuller exposition of the relationship between
the little book of Daniel and the open book of Revelation 10 see the notes that follow.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 26 of 369

 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #4 – NOTES ON REVELATION 10

(Related to Daniel 12:4)

Introduction

There is no passage in Scripture that better portrays the origin, message and mission of the
Seventh-day Adventist Church than Revelation 10. Let’s read the passage highlighting certain
important words and expressions:

Revelation 10:1-11, 11:1: “I saw still another mighty angel coming down from heaven, clothed
with a cloud. And a rainbow was on his head; his face was like the sun, and his feet like pillars of
fire. 2 He had a little book open [having been opened] in his hand. And he set his right foot on the
sea and his left foot on the land, 3 and cried with a loud voice, as when a lion roars. When he cried
out, seven thunders uttered their voices. 4 Now when the seven thunders uttered their voices, I
was about to write; but I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, "Seal up the things which the
seven thunders uttered, and do not write them." 5 The angel whom I saw standing on the sea and
on the land raised up his hand to heaven 6 and swore by Him who lives forever and ever, who
created heaven and the things that are in it, the earth and the things that are in it, and the sea
and the things that are in it, that there should be delay no longer, 7 but in the days of the sounding
of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound, the mystery of God would be finished, as He
declared to His servants the prophets. 8 Then the voice which I heard from heaven spoke to me
again and said, "Go, take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel who stands on the
sea and on the earth." 9 So I went to the angel and said to him, "Give me the little book." And he
said to me: "Take and eat it; and it will make your stomach bitter, but it will be as sweet as honey
in your mouth." 10 Then I took the little book out of the angel's hand and ate it, and it was as sweet
as honey in my mouth. But when I had eaten it, my stomach became bitter. 11 And he said to me,
"You must prophesy again about many peoples, nations, tongues, and kings." Then I was given a
reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying: "Rise and measure the temple of God,
the altar, and those who worship there.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 27 of 369

Summary of the little book episode

At the very center of the chapter is the mighty angel:

 He comes down from heaven to the earth (verse 1).

 His physical characteristics are described (verse 1).
 He brings an open scroll in his hand (verse 2).
 He places one foot on dry land and the other on the sea (verse 2).
 He speaks with the roar of the lion which echoes like seven thunders (verses 3-4).
 He swears the oath to the Creator (verses 5-7).
 He gives the book to John with instructions (verses 8-10).
 He instructs John to prophesy again (verse 11).
 He commands John to measure the temple (11:1).

Who is this Angel Messenger?

Jesus Himself is the Messenger of Revelation 10 therefore the message must be extremely
important.

 This is not just any angel; He is a mighty angel.

 His Face like the sun [Revelation. 1:16].
 He is surrounded by a cloud.
 His feet are like pillars of fire.
 He roars like a lion.
 He has a Rainbow over His head.

“As the bow in the cloud results from the union of sunshine and shower, so the bow above God's
throne represents the union of His mercy and His justice. To the sinful but repentant soul God
says: Live thou; "I have found a ransom." Job 33:24. Education, p. 115

“The mighty angel who instructed John was no less a personage than Jesus Christ.” Seventh-day
Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol 9, p. 971

“The instruction to be communicated to John was so important that Christ came from heaven to
give it to His servant, telling him to send it to the churches.” Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Commentary, Vol. 7 pp. 953, 954

The identity of the Book

Only one book was ever sealed in the Old Testament to be opened at the time of the end:

Daniel 12:4: "But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end;
many [eyes] shall run to and fro, and knowledge [of the book] shall increase."

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 28 of 369

Revelation 10:2 describes the opening of the book of Daniel 12:4. The translations do not really
capture the perfect tense of the verb. The Greek literally reads: “the book, the one having been
opened.” This clearly indicates that the book was closed and then it was opened immediately
before the angel came down from heaven to the earth and swore the oath that time would be
no longer.

The unsealing of the little book is the explanation of the prophetic message of Daniel 8-12,
especially relating to the 2300 days:

“The message of salvation has been preached in all ages; but this message is a part of the gospel
which could be proclaimed only in the last days, for only then would it be true that the hour of
judgment had come. The prophecies present a succession of events leading down to the opening
of the judgment. This is especially true of the book of Daniel. But that part of his prophecy which
related to the last days, Daniel was bidden to close up and seal "to the time of the end." Not till
we reach this time could a message concerning the judgment be proclaimed, based on the
fulfillment of these prophecies. But at the time of the end, says the prophet, "many shall run to
and fro, and knowledge shall be increased." Daniel 12:4. The Great Controversy, p. 356

When was the Book Unsealed?

The book was opened for people to study and proclaim when the sixth angel blew his trumpet.
The book will be sealed once again when the seventh angel is about to blow his trumpet and the
mystery of God is finished. At that time probation will have closed and a message from the
book would no longer do any good because all cases have been decided in the judgment for life
or for death (see Revelation 22:10-12). When the seventh angel blows his trumpet, Jesus takes
over the kingdoms of the world. Thus the book is opened when the sixth trumpet begins to sound
and will be closed when the seventh is about to sound.

Thus we have the following sequence:

 Daniel 12:4: From Daniel’s day till 1798: The judgment hour message in the little book
was sealed and closed (could not be understood).
 Revelation 10; 22:10: In 1798 when the sixth angel began to blow his trumpet, the book
was opened and the judgment hour message was understood and proclaimed.
 Revelation 22:11: When the seventh angel is about to blow his trumpet, the Mystery of
God is finished and probation closes: The book is closed once more because all cases have
been decided and a message from the book would do no good.
 Revelation 11:15-17; 22:12: The seventh angel then blows his trumpet: Jesus comes to
take over the kingdom.

Global Extension

The global extension of the message from the little book is represented symbolically at the
beginning of the chapter (feet on the sea and on the land) and literally at the end of the chapter
(prophesying again to every nation, tongue and kings).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 29 of 369

“The message of Revelation 14, proclaiming that the hour of God's judgment is come, is given in
the time of the end; and the angel of Revelation 10 is represented as having one foot on the sea
and one foot on the land, showing that the message will be carried to distant lands, the ocean
will be crossed, and the islands of the sea will hear the proclamation of the last message of
warning to our world.” Selected Messages, Vol 2, pp. 107, 108

The message of judgment would be proclaimed to the old world and the new world. The act of
planting the feet means staking claim to the land (see Joshua 1:3).

The Seven Thunders

John 12:27 - 29: Thunder is identified as God delivering a message. The peals of thunder are
simply the echo of God’s voice:

"Now My soul is troubled, and what shall I say? 'Father, save Me from this hour'? But for this
purpose I came to this hour. 28 Father, glorify Your name." Then a voice came from heaven, saying,
"I have both glorified it and will glorify it again." 29 Therefore the people who stood by and heard
it said that it had thundered. Others said, "An angel has spoken to Him."

The seven thunders utter their voice immediately preceding the oath so they must have
something to do with events leading up to the time when the angel swears the oath. If the oath
is sworn in 1844 then the thunders must have something to do with events leading up to 1844.
In fact, the seven thunders announced events that transpired between 1842 and 1844. They
uttered that there would be a disappointment leading up to 1844.

John understood what the voice of God uttered but he was forbidden from writing it. In other
words, the message delivered by this angel was given to John, he understood it and was about
to write it out but the angel commanded him to seal it. Ellen White has some perceptive remarks
about the sealing of the seven thunders:

“I saw the people of God joyful in expectation, looking for their Lord. But God designed to prove
them. His hand covered a mistake in the reckoning of the prophetic periods [this is the same as
the sealing of the seven thunders. If John had written down what the thunders said the people
would not have been disappointed]. Those who were looking for their Lord did not discover this
mistake and the most learned men who opposed the time also failed to see it. God designed that
His people should meet with a disappointment. The time passed, and those who had looked with
joyful expectation for their Savior were sad and disheartened, while those who had not loved the
appearing of Jesus, but embraced the message through fear, were pleased that He did not come
at the time of expectation. Their profession had not affected the heart and purified the life. The
passing of the time was well calculated to reveal such hearts. They were the first to turn and
ridicule the sorrowful, disappointed ones who really loved the appearing of their Savior. I saw the
wisdom of God in proving His people and giving them a searching test to discover those who
would shrink and turn back in the hour of trial. Early Writings, pp. 235, 236

“The special light given to John which was expressed in the seven thunders was a delineation of
events which would transpire under the first and second angels' messages. It was not best for
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 30 of 369
the people to know these things, for their faith must necessarily be tested.” Seventh-day
Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 971

The Oath

After the seven thunders utter their message the mighty angel swears an oath that time will be
no longer. What time is here referred to?

“This time, which the angel declares with a solemn oath, is not the end of this world's history,
neither of probationary time, but of prophetic time, which should precede the advent of our Lord.
That is, the people will not have another message upon definite time. After this period of time,
reaching from 1842 to 1844, there can be no definite tracing of the prophetic time. The longest
reckoning reaches to the autumn of 1844.” Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p.
971

There are two biblical reasons why the time referred to in this verse cannot mean the end of
human history:

1. This announcement is made during the period of the sixth trumpet and Jesus does not
come to take over his kingdom until the seventh trumpet (Revelation 11:15-19).
2. After the announcement was made that “time will be no longer,” John was instructed to
prophesy again (Revelation 10:11). How could he do this if the world had come to an
end?

The translation “there should no longer be any delay” in many modern versions is incorrect. In
the book of Revelation, the word chronos is used three other times and in none of them can the
word be translated in such a way (Revelation 2:21; 6:11; 20:3) In fact this word is translated
“time” in over 30 places in the New Testament and it is not translated ‘delay’ by modern versions
except in this verse. The New Testament had a way to express a delay and that is the word
chronizo that is used in Matthew 24:48 where the servant states: “my master is delayed.”

It is obvious that the declaration: “time will be no longer” cannot have been made by the angel
before the 42 months (Revelation 11:2; 13:5), 1260 days (Revelation 11:3; 12:6), 3 ½ times
(Revelation 12:14; Daniel 7:25), 3 ½ days (Revelation 11:9, 11) and 2300 days (Daniel 8:14) were
fulfilled.

As part of the oath the mighty angel swears in the name of the Creator and actually alludes to
the language of the Fourth Commandment. When John is given the command by the mighty
angel to prophesy again he is referring to the first angel’s message of Revelation 14:6, 7.

The Mystery of God

Revelation 10:7 begins with a strong adversative ‘but’. This ‘but’ clearly marks a time separation
between when the announcement is made that ‘time will be no longer’ and the moment when
the sounding of the seventh trumpet begins.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 31 of 369

What the text is saying is that the declaration that “time will be no longer” is made during the
period of the sixth trumpet but the mystery of God will not be finished until the seventh trumpet
is about to begin to sound. This clearly shows that the end of prophetic time comes during the
sixth trumpet and before the seventh. The sequence is like this:

 Sixth trumpet begins to sound: The mighty angel opens the book and swears the oath
that prophetic time will be no longer.
 Seventh trumpet about to sound: Mystery of God is finished.
 Seventh trumpet sounds: Jesus takes over the kingdoms of the world.

What is the mystery of God?

Romans 16:25-27:

“Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus
Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now
made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures made known to all nations, according to the
commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith 27 to God, alone wise, be glory
through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.”

“The incarnation of Christ is a mystery. The union of divinity with humanity is a mystery indeed,
hidden with God, "even the mystery which hath been hid from ages." It was kept in eternal silence
by Jehovah, and was first revealed in Eden, by the prophecy that the Seed of the woman should
bruise the serpent's head, and that he should bruise his heel. To present to the world this mystery
that God kept in silence for eternal ages before the world was created, before man was created,
was the part that Christ was to act in the work he entered upon when he came to this earth. And
this wonderful mystery, the incarnation of Christ and the atonement that he made, must be
declared to every son and daughter of Adam, whether Jew or Gentile.” Signs of the Times,
March 25, 1897

The mystery of God is finished (probation closes) when the seventh trumpet is about to sound.
When the seventh trumpet sounds Jesus takes over the kingdom. When the mystery of God is
finished, Jesus will take off His priestly robes and change into his garments of vengeance. This is
parallel to Daniel 12:1 where the expression ‘to stand up’ means ‘to begin to rule’ (Daniel 11:2,
3).

Revelation 22:10-12 has the sequence:

“And he said to me, "Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book [in other words, a message
that can be understood is still coming from the book of Revelation which decodes the book of
Daniel], for the time is at hand [for the book to be closed—the close of probation].11 He who is
unjust, let him be unjust still; he who is filthy, let him be filthy still; he who is righteous, let him be
righteous still; he who is holy, let him be holy still. 12 "And behold, I am coming quickly, and My
reward is with Me, to give to everyone according to his work” [Jesus takes over the kingdom along
with His people].
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 32 of 369
The Bittersweet Experience

The contents of the unsealed book cause a bittersweet experience: Sweet at first but then bitter
in the aftermath. The judgment hour message must have caused a mixed experience.

That eating the scroll means to assimilate the message to then share it with God’s people. This
is corroborated by the closest Biblical parallel in Ezekiel 3:1-4 where the prophet is told to eat
the scroll and then he is told to go share the message with Israel.

Notice the chiastic structure of Revelation 10:9-11:

A. The angel tells John to take the scroll and eat it (verse 9a).
B. It will be bitter in your stomach (verse 9b).
C. In your mouth it will be sweet as honey (9c).

C. It tasted as sweet as honey in my mouth (verse 10a).

B. It was bitter in my stomach (verse 10b).
A. You must prophesy again (verse 11).

This chiastic structure is important because it shows that John’s eating the scroll in verse 9a is
the same as uttering a prophecy from it in verse 11. Thus when John ate the scroll a message
came out from it the first time. But afterward it became necessary for the message to be
preached again from the same scroll.

It is very clear that the episode that deals with the eating of the book precedes Revelation 10:7
in time. How do we know that? The reason is obvious. After John eats the little book and it is
sweet in his mouth and bitter in his stomach he is told to prophecy again and to measure the
temple. If the mystery of God (the preaching of the gospel) had already been finished and
probation had closed, what good would it do to prophesy again about the contents of the book
and to talk about the investigative judgment? Clearly verses 8-11 take us back to events that
occurred between verses 6 and 7.

The Disappointment

Ellen White:

“The comprehension of truth, the glad reception of the message, is represented in the eating of
the little book. The truth in regard to the time of the advent of our Lord was a precious message
to our souls.” (Manuscript 59, 1900) Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Volume 7 p. 971

Hiram Edson:

“. . . we confidently expected to see Jesus Christ and all the holy angels with him; and that his
voice would call up Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and all the ancient worthies, and dear friends
which had been torn from us by death, and that our trials and sufferings, with our earthly
pilgrimage would close, and we should be caught up to meet our coming Lord to be forever with
him, to inhabit bright golden mansions in the golden home city prepared for the redeemed. Our

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 33 of 369

expectations were raised high, and thus we looked for our coming Lord until the clock tolled 12,
at midnight. The day had then passed and our disappointment became a certainty. Our fondest
hopes and expectations were blasted, and such a spirit of weeping came over us as I never
experienced before. It seemed that the loss of all earthly friends could have been no comparison.
We wept, and wept, till the day dawn. I mused in my own heart, saying, My advent experience
has been the richest and brightest of all my Christian experience. If this had proved a failure, what
was the rest of my Christian experience worth? Has the Bible proved a failure? Is there no God,
no heaven, no golden home city, no paradise? Is all this but a cunningly devised fable? Is there no
reality to our fondest hope and expectation of these things? And thus we had something to grieve
and weep over, if all our fond hopes were lost. And as I said, we wept till the day dawn.” Hiram
Edson, manuscript fragment on his "Life and Experience," no date, pp. 4-5, Ellen G. White
Research Center, James White Library, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Mich.

Washington Morse:

“The passing of the time was a bitter disappointment. True believers had given up all for Christ,
and had shared His presence as never before. The love of Jesus filled every soul; and with
inexpressible desire they prayed, ‘Come, Lord Jesus, and come quickly;’ but He did not come. And
now, to turn again to the cares, perplexities, and dangers of life, in full view of jeering and reviling
unbelievers who scoffed as never before, was a terrible trial of faith and patience. When elder
Himes visited Waterbury, Vermont, a short time after the passing of the time, and stated that the
brethren should prepare for another cold winter, my feelings were almost incontrollable. I left the
place of meeting and wept like a child.” Washington Morse, “Remembrance of Former Days,”
The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, May 7, 1901

William Miller:

“It passed. And the next day it seemed as though all the demons from the bottomless pit were let
loose upon us. The same ones and many more who were crying for mercy two days before, were
not mixed with the rabble and mocking, scoffing, and threatening in a most blasphemous
manner.” Words of William Miller in a letter to I. O. Orr, M. D. dated December 13, 1844

The experience of the Millerites is very similar to what happened to the disciples. They had never
experienced anything sweeter than the triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem on a donkey.
They were sure that He was going to establish His kingdom on earth. Jesus was even going to
fulfill the prophecy of the Seventy Weeks. But they were bitterly disappointed in their
expectations. After the bitter disappointment Jesus caught up to two of his followers on the road
to Emmaus and explained the prophecies that they had misunderstood. Jesus then entered the
holy place in heaven to begin His ministry there and he gave the apostles power to preach again
but with the added understanding of what Jesus was doing. (Matthew 28:18-20).

The Millerites also had a sweet experience. They were sure that Jesus was going to establish His
kingdom on earth in 1844. He even was fulfilling a specific Bible prophecy, the 2300 days (of
which the 70 weeks are the smaller portion). But their expectations were dashed because they
misunderstood prophecy. Jesus then explained the prophecies that they had misunderstood and
they realized that Jesus had moved into the most holy place to measure the temple. They were

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 34 of 369

told to prophesy again but with the added understanding of what Jesus was doing. That message
is found in Revelation 14:6-12

Prophesying Again

After the bittersweet experience another message is to come from the little book and that
message has to do with the measuring of the heavenly temple. You cannot prophesy again
unless you have done it once. Prophesy again but no time element involved!!

Why are the kings mentioned as one of those to whom John is to bear witness? Because
Revelation 17:10, 12 tells us that the kings will fornicate with the harlot and they must be
warned about the judgment to come. This is why they are added to the list instead of tribes.

It is no coincidence that God raised up the Seventh-day Adventist church shortly after 1844 to
fulfill the task of prophesying again to the world about the measuring of the heavenly temple. It
is no coincidence that God raised up a people to proclaim that message.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 35 of 369

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 36 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #5 – THE HISTORICAL CHAPTERS OF DANIEL

Introduction

The books of Daniel and Revelation are saturated with symbolic terminology. A metallic man,
savage beasts, domestic sanctuary animals, mysterious horns that speak, strange actions (such
as eating a book that is sweet in the mouth and the bitter in the stomach) and mystical numbers
fill their pages. In order to understand this exotic language, it is necessary to decipher or decode
this symbolic language.

In contrast to these apocalyptic chapters in Daniel, we have the simple, down to earth stories
that are found in the first half of the book.

These stories are straightforward and easy to understand and they seem to need no decoding.
What child has not been inspired by the story of the three young men who were delivered from
the fiery furnace? And who can ever forget the story of Daniel’s deliverance from the mouths of
the lions? No doubt these stories were written to encourage God’s people at all times and in all
places.

A Deeper Dimension

However, the stories in the first half of Daniel (Daniel 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6) have a deeper dimension
than appears on the surface. The stories of Daniel are not mere stories that happened ‘once
upon a time.’ These stories actually illustrate, in narrative form the symbolic language of the
book. Stated another way, the stories actually decode the symbols and help us understand in
simple matter-of-fact language the meaning of these symbols in the apocalyptic portions of the
book. These stories are local and literal types that illustrate world-wide and spiritual events in
the time of the end.

Once we understand the reasons for the conflict in the historical sections of Daniel we can then
comprehend the nature of the conflict in the apocalyptic sections. Let’s take a look at some
details in the historical chapters to see how they point us to the time of the end.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 37 of 369

Daniel 1: The two sides in the conflict introduced

 Two kings: Jehoiakim versus Nebuchadnezzar.

 Two gods: Yahweh versus Marduk.
 Two cities: Babylon versus Jerusalem.
 Two temples: God’s temple versus Marduk’s temple.
 Two peoples: The Hebrews versus the Babylonians.

In the introduction to the book we find a contrast between Babylon and God’s people in the time
of the end. The king attempted to change the mindset and conduct of the Daniel and his friends
in four significant ways:

First, he attempted to do it by having them enrolled in the University of Babylon and determining
their curriculum. He felt that by teaching them the culture, the philosophy the language and the
religion of Babylon their way of thinking would be changed. The king hoped that this would cause
a shift in their world view. Yet the Hebrew worthies never used the divination methods that
they learned in the University. Prayer was their means of communing with their God. When push
came to shove they were faithful to God.

Secondly, the king attempted to change their allegiance by continually rubbing it in their face
that the god of Babylon was superior to their God. After all, if their God was greater than Marduk,
why were they captive in Babylon? It is obvious that the King was not able to convince or compel
them because they proved themselves loyal only to the true God even in the face of death!

Third, the king attempted to change their thinking and conduct by appointing their food and
their drink. But they refused to eat the Babylonian food and drink its wine and instead they
partook of a Hebrew diet.

Fourth the king attempted to change their allegiance by changing their names from Hebrew
names that honored their God to Babylonian names that honored the Babylonian gods (see
Daniel 4:8). Yet in the book we never find Daniel and his three friends using their Babylonian
names. Whenever they or God referred to them or they referred to themselves they always used
their Hebrew names.

God’s loyal servants were a people of principle. Daniel purposed in his heart (made a decision
of the will) that he would not defile himself. This decision of the will was exhibited in their
conduct.

Daniel and his friends were faithful in the small tests and therefore proved faithful in the large
tests.

Counsels on Health, p. 66:

“What if Daniel and his companions had made a compromise with those heathen officers, and
had yielded to the pressure of the occasion by eating and drinking as was customary with the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 38 of 369

Babylonians? That single instance of departure from principle would have weakened their sense
of right and their abhorrence of wrong. Indulgence of appetite would have involved the sacrifice
of physical vigor, clearness of intellect, and spiritual power. One wrong step would probably
have led to others, until, their connection with heaven being severed, they would have been swept
away by temptation.”

A further study of Daniel 3 and 6 will reveal that Daniel and his friends foreshadow the character
that the final generation of God’s people will have. Their [1] world view will not be changed by
the vain philosophies of Babylon, they will not receive the [2] name of the beast, they will not
[3] drink Babylon’s wine and they will not be [4] intimidated by the idea that they are an
insignificant minority.

Daniel 3

This story prefigures the symbolic story of Revelation 13:11-18. The two passages have many
common details.

 In both there is a conflict between the religion of Babylon and the religion of God’s
faithful remnant.
 The King did not like the perspective of history that God had revealed in Daniel 2 so the
Chaldeans suggested that he make an image like the one he had seen in his dream but
entirely of gold. In this way he would be making an in-your-face statement to God that
he was in control of history and his kingdom would be eternal.
 In both Daniel and Revelation, we find reference to a beast.
 In both books we find image of the beast.
 In both books we have a record of numbers that bear a relationship with the sun.
 In both books people from every nation, tongue and people are commanded to worship
the image.
 In both books there is a death decree against those who fail to obey the order to worship
the image of the beast.
 In both books there is a faithful and insignificant remnant whose life is governed by
principle. They would rather die that worship the image of the beast.
 There was a shaking in the Valley of Dura.
 In both books the conflict is over worship and obedience to the commandments of God—
particularly the first table of the law.
 In both books, the religious leaders accuse the people of God before the civil power.
 The wrath of the King prefigures the wrath of the dragon against the final remnant that
keep the commandments of God.
 Ellen White makes some interesting remarks about the King’s body language when he
spoke the words of Daniel 3:15. He spoke these words “with hand stretched upward in
defiance” (Signs of the Times, May 6, 1897).
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 39 of 369
  She also saw his face: “Satanic attributes made his countenance appear as the
countenance of a demon.” (Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Volume 4 p. 1169)
 Daniel 3 is a vivid illustration of what happens when the religious power influences the
civil power to establish religious observances. This chapter shows what will happen when
the government will violate the establishment clause of the First amendment to the
Constitution.
 The three young men went through a terrible time of trouble where their faith was
severely tested. The furnace was heated seven times hotter than ever before. Yet the
young men stood with great courage before the king and refused to worship the image
to the beast. They preferred to die than to sin. They went through the fire but are not
consumed! Speaking about God’s end time remnant, Ellen White states:

“Their affliction is great, the flames of the furnace seem about to consume them; but the
Refiner will bring them forth as gold tried in the fire. God's love for His children during the
period of their severest trial is as strong and tender as in the days of their sunniest
prosperity; but it is needful for them to be placed in the furnace of fire; their earthliness
must be consumed, that the image of Christ may be perfectly reflected.” The Great
Controversy, p. 621

 In both chapters Jesus Christ is the hero. At the critical moment Jesus stood up to defend
and deliver His faithful remnant from certain death!
 In Daniel 3 the Aramaic word ‘deliver’ is found four times (Daniel 3:15, 17 [2x], 28). As
we shall see in a few minutes, this same word is used five times in chapter 6 (Daniel 6:14,
16, 20, 27 [2x]). The equivalent Hebrew word is used also in Daniel 11:41 and 12:1 to
describe the final deliverance of God’s people from the King of the north who will go out
with great fury to destroy them.
 These are the only places in the book of Daniel where the word ‘deliver’ is used so there
must be a link between these chapters.
 As we study the stories of Daniel 3 and 6 we can know for certain that the issues in the
final conflict will not be over the oil of the Middle East or of the Palestinians against the
Jews or the Muslims against the Jews. The final conflict will be over worship and the
commandments of God versus the commandments of men.

Those who are in a personal covenant relationship with the Lord will be delivered, every one
whose name is written in the book.

 As a loving Husband, Jesus will protect His covenant wife.

 As a faithful Shepherd, Jesus will protect His covenant sheep.
 As a Sovereign King, Jesus will protect His covenant subjects.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 40 of 369

  As the Head, Jesus will protect His covenant body.
 God will keep His covenant with those who serve him.

A very important principle

Literal Israel was literally captive in literal Babylon, the literal king behaved like a literal beast,
set up a literal image in a literal valley, commanding everyone to literally bow and worship the
literal image. A remnant of literal Jews refused to literally bow before the literal image and
therefore they were thrown into a literal fiery furnace and were delivered from the literal flames
by Christ who literally came into the literal furnace.

The story of Daniel 3 foreshadows the final conflict over Sabbath/Sunday:

“An idol sabbath has been set up, as the golden image was set up in the plains of Dura. And as
Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, issued a decree that all who would not bow down and
worship this image should be killed, so a proclamation will be made that all who will not reverence
the Sunday institution will be punished with imprisonment and death.” Manuscript Releases,
volume 14, p. 91

Daniel 5

 This chapter is foundational to understand the prophecy of Revelation 16 and 17.

 In both chapters the city of Babylon is seated upon the many waters of the River Euphrates.
 Babylon feels secure because she is protected by her river—multitudes, nations, tongues and
peoples.
 The leader of Babylon gives her literal wine to the nations and this does not allow them to
distinguish between what is holy and what is common (the story of Nadab and Abihu illustrates
a similar Truth).
 In both chapters the inability to distinguish between the holy and the common leads to false
worship and idolatry.
 In both chapters probation closes before the fall of Babylon by a divine decree (Revelation 22:11).
 In both chapters the deliverance of God’s people comes from the north and the east.
 In both chapters the drying up of the Euphrates leads to the fall of Babylon.
 In both chapters God’s people are delivered from Babylon so that they can return to their lost
homeland in Jerusalem.

Summary of Daniel 5

On literal Babylon’s final night, the literal king was drinking literal wine in literal cups, was
worshiping literal idols when a literal hand began to write a literal message on a literal wall in
the literal palace which announced the literal fall of literal Babylon. Cyrus, the deliverer came
from the literal east, dried up the literal river Euphrates and in this way the literal city of Babylon
to deliver literal Israel from literal bondage so that they could return and build the literal city of
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 41 of 369
Jerusalem. All of this has symbolic value in the book of Revelation and is fulfilled globally and
spiritually!

Daniel 6

 Daniel was full of the Holy Spirit.

 Daniel had a profound relationship with God as is revealed in his life of prayer. His
relationship with God was more important than life itself. He would rather die than sin.
 Daniel had a passion to comprehend the prophecy of the 2300 days. Actually, as we shall
see in our last study today, this prophecy is at the core of Daniel 8-12.
 Daniel was faithful in the secular affairs of everyday life. His enemies could find no fault
in his service to the King. He was obedient to the second table of the law. He was also
faithful to the first table of the law as can be seen in Daniel 6:4:

“So the governors and satraps sought to find some charge against Daniel concerning the
kingdom; but they could find no charge or fault, because he was faithful; nor was there
any error or fault found in him.”

 His enemies had to find fault with Daniel’s religious convictions and practices—the first
table of the law. Notice Daniel 6:5:

“Then these men said, "We shall not find any charge against this Daniel unless we
find it against him concerning the law of his God."
 So the issue in the conflict was the law of God (primarily the first table) versus the laws of men.
 The civil power gave a religious decree. This was a violation of the second clause of the First
Amendment to the Constitution—the free exercise of religion.
 There was a faithful remnant which had a deep covenant relationship with the Lord and refused
to obey the religious law that was given by the civil power.
 The religious law was written and signed by the King with a death decree in it against those who
disobeyed.
 Daniel faced death for disobeying this religious law that was imposed by the state.
 The idea for this law did not come from the King. The civil power was not inimical to Daniel. The
king’s counselors were behind the plot.
 God allowed Daniel to go through the tribulation so that his trust in God could be revealed before
all of those who were present. In this way God was glorified in his servant, Daniel. Does this have
anything to say about the character that will be possessed by the end time generation?
 The word deliver is used 5 times in Daniel 6 (verses 14 {2 x’s}, 16, 20, 27). It is the key word in
the entire story.
 Daniel was delivered because he trusted in his God. The word “trusted” in the LXX is the same
word that is translated ‘faith’ in the New Testament.
 Those who prepared the plot died with their own weapons.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 42 of 369

Daniel 11:40-12:1

Daniel 3 and 6 are the foundation to understand Daniel 11:40-12:1. At the very end, the king of
the north (spiritual Babylon, little horn, man of sin, beast, harlot, abomination of desolation) will
go out with the intention of annihilating God’s people. Why will the king of the north want to do
this?

Daniel 3 and 6 reveal that it will have to do with the religious convictions of God’s people. The
issue will be worship and obedience to God’ Commandments. But at the critical moment, when
God’s people are about to be destroyed, Michael will stand up. God’s people will go through the
time of trouble such as has never been seen but they will be delivered (the key word), everyone
that is found written in the book. Then God’s people will shine as stars throughout eternity.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 43 of 369

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 44 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #6 – NOTES ON DANIEL 1

Historical Background to Daniel 1

In God’s providence, Daniel grew up under the influence of Josiah’s reform which began in 621
BC. At this time Daniel was just an infant. Daniel undoubtedly was home schooled so his
education was of optimum quality. His early training helped him remain faithful to God when he
was taken captive to Babylon. Daniel was 18 years old when he was taken captive (Testimonies
for the Church, Volume 4, p. 570)

How could God allow a righteous person like Daniel to be taken captive to Babylon along with
the unrighteous?

 Though Daniel’s captivity appeared to be a curse, it was actually a blessing in disguise as

was Joseph’s ordeal in Egypt.
 Daniel brought the knowledge of the true God to the greatest empire and king the world
has ever seen.
 The book of Daniel was given while Daniel was captive in Babylon.
 Through the ministry of Daniel Nebuchadnezzar was converted to the Lord.
 God used Daniel to lead His people out of captivity at the end of the 70 years.
 Romans 8:28 was certainly fulfilled in the lives of both Daniel and Joseph.

The Great Controversy Theme in Daniel

Daniel 1 contains the seeds of the rest of the book as well as of the book of Revelation. In Daniel
1 the battle lines are clearly drawn between the two sides in the great controversy:

 Two kings: Jehoiakim and Nebuchadnezzar.

 Two Gods: Jehovah and Marduk.
 Two Cities: Babylon and Jerusalem.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 45 of 369

  Two temples: God’s temple and Marduk’s temple.
 Two peoples: The Hebrews and the Babylonians.

By all appearances Nebuchadnezzar, Marduk, Babylon, Marduk’s temple and the Babylonians
prevailed over Jehoiakim, Jehovah, Jerusalem, God’s temple and the Hebrews.

As we have seen, the central theme of Daniel is: Who is in control of world history? The book of
Daniel answers this question by making it unmistakably clear that Jehovah sits on the throne of
the universe. He sets up kings and removes kings. He gives wisdom to the wise. He changes the
times and the seasons. It is the God of the Hebrews who guides history to its intended end in
spite of all the obstacles that human kings put in the way. Daniel 1 makes it crystal clear that
Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem only because the God of heaven gave it into his hand. This
theme reappears in each and every chapter of the book.

Enrolled in the University of Babylon

In several ways, Nebuchadnezzar attempted to show that he was in control of historical events.
In Daniel 1:4 we are told that the king had Daniel and his friends enrolled in the University of
Babylon. It was his intention to brainwash the Hebrew worthies with Babylon’s world view.

The Chaldeans (Kasolim) were a priestly caste of astrologers who felt that they could discern the
future in the stars (see Daniel 2:2, 4, 5, 10). They were the official spokesmen for the religion of
Babylon. Isaiah 47:13 describes the Babylonian methods of divination which God abhorred. The
king wanted to brainwash Daniel and his friends by having them study the Babylonian religion,
culture, philosophy and language. It was the intention of the king to cause a paradigm shift in the
thinking of the Hebrews.

Regarding this Ellen White remarks:

“The great men of Babylon were willing to be benefited by the instruction that God gave through
Daniel, to help the king out of his difficulty by the interpretation of his dream. But they were
anxious to mix in their heathen religion with that of the Hebrews. Had Daniel and his fellows
consented to such a compromise, they would, in the view of the Babylonians, have been complete
as statesmen, fit to be entrusted with the affairs of the kingdom. But the four Hebrews entered
into no such arrangement. They were true to God, and God upheld them and honored them.”
Manuscript Releases, volume 16, pp. 336, 337

Power of Persuasion

Nebuchadnezzar attempted to persuade Daniel and his friends that his god was more powerful
than theirs (Daniel 1:1, 2). After all, he reasoned, had not his god given him the victory over the
Hebrews?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 46 of 369

With regards to this Ellen White wrote:

“The fact that these men, worshipers of Jehovah, were captives in Babylon, and that the vessels
of God's house had been placed in the Temple of the Babylonish gods, was boastfully cited by the
victors as evidence that their religion and customs were superior to the religion and customs of
the Hebrews.” Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 479, 480

Changing the Diet

Nebuchadnezzar attempted to influence Daniel and his friends by appointing them a Babylonian
diet (Daniel 1:5). By appointing a substitute diet, the king was attempting to take the place of
God who had originally appointed man’s diet.

Man’s original diet was ‘appointed’ by God (Genesis 1:29). It consisted of water to drink and fruits
to eat. It was a vegetarian diet. The expression ‘to you it shall be for food’ (Genesis 1:29) is the
same as Daniel 1:5 where the ‘king appointed for them’ their food. In other words,
Nebuchadnezzar was taking over the prerogatives of God. He was providing a diet different than
that which God had originally appointed for man. Thus the king is attempting to exercise the
prerogatives of the Creator.

There were six problems with Babylon’s food:

First, the meats were not prepared according to the specifications of the dietary laws given by
God to Moses (see Leviticus 17:14, 15; Acts 15:29). It was customary for the gentiles to eat the
blood and fat of animals which was forbidden by God.

Second, some of the meats were unclean. The gentile nations ate swine’s flesh and also mice
(see Isaiah 66:17; Deuteronomy 14:7, 8).

“Among the viands placed before the king were swine's flesh and other meats which were
declared unclean by the Law of Moses, and which the Hebrews had been expressly forbidden to
eat. Here Daniel was brought to a severe test. Should he adhere to the teachings of his Fathers
concerning meats and drinks, and offend the king, and probably lose not only his position but his
life? Or should he disregard the commandment of the Lord, and retain the favor of the king, thus
securing great intellectual advantages and the most flattering worldly prospects?

Daniel did not long hesitate. He decided to stand firm in his integrity, let the result be what it
might. He "purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king's
meat, nor with the wine which he drank" (Daniel 1:8)

There are many among professed Christians today who would decide that Daniel was too
particular, and would pronounce him narrow and bigoted. They consider the matter of eating and
drinking as of too little consequence to require such a decided stand--one involving the probable
sacrifice of every earthly advantage. But those who reason thus will find in the Day of Judgment
that they turned from God's express requirements and set up their own opinion as a standard of
right and wrong. They will find that what seemed to them unimportant was not so regarded of
God. His requirements should be sacredly obeyed.” The Sanctified Life, pp. 19, 20

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 47 of 369

Third, a portion of the meat had been offered to idols (see Deuteronomy 28:37, 38; 1 Corinthians
8)

“A second consideration of these youthful captives was that the king always asked a blessing
before his meals, and addressed his idols as Deity. He set apart a portion of his food to be
presented to the idol gods whom he worshiped, and also a portion of the wine. This act,
according to their religious instruction, consecrated the whole to the heathen god. To sit at the
table where such idolatry was practiced, Daniel and his three brethren deemed would be a
dishonor to the God of heaven. These four children decided that they could not sit at the king's
table to eat of the food placed there, or to partake of the wine, all of which had been dedicated
to an idol god. This would indeed implicate them with heathenism, and dishonor the principles
of their national religion and their God.” Manuscript Releases, volume 4, p. 126

“To Daniel and his companions, at the very outset of their career, there came a decisive test. The
direction that their food should be supplied from the royal table was an expression both of the
king's favor and of his solicitude for their welfare. But a portion having been offered to idols, the
food from the king's table was consecrated to idolatry; and in partaking of the king's bounty
these youth would be regarded as uniting in his homage to false gods. In such homage loyalty to
Jehovah forbade them to participate. Nor dared they risk the enervating effect of luxury and
dissipation on physical, mental, and spiritual development.” Education, pp. 54, 55

Fourth, on the table were most likely found delicacies that God had forbidden his people to
indulge in (see Proverbs 23:1-3).

Fifth, Daniel and his friends carefully studied the story of Nadab and Abihu and understood the
effect that wine has upon their ability to distinguish the holy from the common (Leviticus 10;
Isaiah 5:20-23).

“They were acquainted with the history of Nadab and Abihu, the record of whose intemperance
had been preserved in the parchments of the Pentateuch.” The Youth’s Instructor, June 4, 1903

Finally, and most importantly, Daniel and his friends understood that their physical habits were
closely linked with their mental and spiritual welfare:

“Anything that lessens physical strength enfeebles the mind and makes it less capable of
discriminating between right and wrong. We become less capable of choosing the good and have
less strength of will to do that which we know to be right.” Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 346

“What if Daniel and his companions had made a compromise with those heathen officers and had
yielded to the pressure of the occasion by eating and drinking as was customary with the
Babylonians? That single instance of departure from principle would have weakened their sense
of right and their abhorrence of wrong. Indulgence of appetite would have involved the sacrifice
of physical vigor, clearness of intellect, and spiritual power. One wrong step would probably have
led to others, until, their connection with Heaven being severed, they would have been swept
away by temptation.” The Sanctified Life, p. 23

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 48 of 369

Daniel chose to be faithful to God. The expression ‘purposed in his heart’ means that ‘he made
up his mind’. It was a decision of the will which led to right action. Notice that there were other
Hebrews present in Nebuchadnezzar’s court (Daniel 1:6) but only Daniel and his friends chose to
be faithful to principle. And in the rest of the book of Daniel, God used only these four Hebrews
to bring honor and glory to His name (see chapters 2, 3 and 6). When we are faithful to God, He
will use us in a powerful way in His service and for His glory.

Changing Names

Nebuchadnezzar changed the names of the Hebrew worthies thus indicating that it was his
intention to change their characters.

In the Bible the giving of names is a sign of authority (see for example Genesis 1:19, 20; 5:2).

The expression ‘gave names’ is used exclusively when God gives names (see Deuteronomy 12:3-
5). Only God has the right to change a name because only God can change the character (see for
example Genesis 32:27, 28).

Ellen White understood what Nebuchadnezzar was up to when he changed the names of the
Hebrew worthies:

“The names of Daniel and his companions were changed to names representing Chaldean deities.
Great significance was attached to the names given by Hebrew parents to their children. Often
these stood for traits of character that the parent desired to see developed in the child. The prince
in whose charge the captive youth were placed "gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and
to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego."

The king did not compel the Hebrew youth to renounce their faith in favor of idolatry, but he
hoped to bring this about gradually. By giving them names significant of idolatry, by bringing
them daily into close association with idolatrous customs, and under the influence of the seductive
rites of heathen worship, he hoped to induce them to renounce the religion of their nation and to
unite with the worship of the Babylonians.” Prophets and Kings, pp. 480, 481

“Anciently the name of a child stood for his character, and the names given to these children were
characteristic of what it was expected they would become. They were young in years, and this
change in their names it was believed would make an impression on their minds. In a little while,
it was hoped, their former religion would be forgotten, and they would become in character and
purpose like the Chaldean youth about them.” The Youth’s Instructor, October 29, 1907

In Hebrew the word ‘El’ means ‘God’. The word ‘Yah’ stands for Yahweh. So, when we find a
name like ‘Elijah’ it means ‘my God is Yahweh’. The name ‘Daniel’ means ‘God is my judge’. This
name was changed to ‘Belteshazzar’ which means ‘may Bel protect’. The name Hananiah means
‘the grace of Yahweh’. This name was changed to Shadrach which means ‘the command of Aku’.
The name Mishael means ‘who is what God is?’ This name was changed to Meshach which means
‘who is what Aku is?’ The name Azariah means ‘the help of Yahweh’. This name was changed to

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 49 of 369

Abednego which means ‘the servant of Nabu’. It is obvious that the king changed the names of
the Hebrew worthies to honor his gods in place of the God of heaven!

Daniel 4:8, 9 clearly reveals that Daniel was given a name in honor of the Babylonian God Bel.
We see here a battle between Daniel’s God and Nebuchadnezzar’s god. As we shall see, the God
of Daniel prevails (see Daniel 2:1).

Faithfulness of Daniel and his Three Friends

Daniel and his three friends never recognized the supremacy of the Babylonian gods. Daniel
chapters 2-6 clearly reveal that they remained faithful to Yahweh all their lives.

Daniel and his friends never used their Babylonian names to refer to themselves. They always
employed their Hebrew names (see Daniel 7:28; 8:1, 15, 27; 10:2, 7). Also, God never called them
by their Babylonian names.

Though Daniel and his friends studied in the school of Babylon, they did not allow themselves to
be brainwashed. They did not employ the Babylonian methods of divination (Daniel 2); they
always sought the Lord in prayer (see Daniel 2:17, 18; 6:10). For this reason, Daniel and his friends
were considered outcasts by their peers (see Daniel 3:8, 12; 6:4-6).

Daniel and his friends refused to eat the food of Babylon. Instead, they asked for water and
‘pulse’ (Daniel 1:8). According to the World Book Dictionary, pulse is ‘the seeds of a group of
plants such as peas, beans, and lentils used as food, a plant that yields such seeds.’ The word
comes from the Latin word puls.

“Daniel's clearness of mind and firmness of purpose, his strength of intellect in acquiring
knowledge, were due in a great degree to the plainness of his diet in connection with his life of
prayer.” 4 Testimonies for the Church, p. 515

Daniel and his friends excelled physically (Daniel 1:15), mentally (Daniel 1:19, 20) and spiritually
(Daniel 1:17).

Daniel’s secret of victory:

 Fervent and constant prayer (see for example, Daniel 2, Daniel 6 and Daniel 9).
 Daniel was an avid student of Scripture (see Daniel 9:1, 2).
 Daniel stood as a faithful witness for God (Daniel 1, 3, 6).
 Daniel was temperate in all things (Daniel 1).
 Daniel stood for principle:

“How did he become fitted for a position of so great trust and honor? It was his faithfulness
in the little things that gave complexion to his whole life. He honored God in the smallest
duties, and the Lord co-operated with him. To Daniel and his companions God gave

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 50 of 369

 "knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom; and Daniel had understanding in all
visions and dreams." Daniel 1:17. Christ’s Object Lessons, pp. 356, 357

The End Time Dimension of Daniel

The experiences of Daniel and his friends illustrate and prefigure the experience of God’s final
remnant:

Daniel had no blemish (Daniel 1:4; 6:4, 5) or fault. The same will be true of the end-time
generation (see Revelation 14:5).

Daniel was filled with the Holy Spirit (Daniel 6:3; 4:8, 9; 5:11-14) as will the end time generation.

Daniel and his friends were men of prayer:

“Daniel's clearness of mind and firmness of purpose, his strength of intellect in acquiring
knowledge, were due in a great degree to the plainness of his diet, in connection with his life of
prayer” Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 82

Daniel was greatly beloved (Daniel 9:23; Revelation 3:9).

Daniel and his friends followed strict temperate habits.

“Let none who profess godliness regard with indifference the health of the body, and flatter
themselves that intemperance is no sin and will not affect their spirituality. A close sympathy
exists between the physical and the moral nature. The standard of virtue is elevated or degraded
by the physical habits. Excessive eating of the best of food will produce a morbid condition of the
moral feelings. And if the food is not the most healthful, the effects will be still more injurious.
Any habit which does not promote healthful action in the human system degrades the higher and
nobler faculties. . . Indulgence of appetite strengthens the animal propensities, giving them the
ascendancy over the mental and spiritual powers.” Maranatha, p. 81

Daniel witnessed in the courts of the kings of Babylon and Medo-Persia, God’s people will also
stand in the courts of kings (Luke 21:12).

The lives of Daniel and his friends were governed by principle. They did not allow the
circumstances that surrounded them to influence their decisions and behavior. They were
faithful even in the smallest duties (see Luke 16:10; Jeremiah 12:5) and they would have rather
died than be unfaithful to God:

“It was faithfulness in little things that gave complexion to their whole life. They honored God in
the smallest duties, as well as in the larger responsibilities.” Prophets and Kings, p. 487

“Daniel possessed the grace of genuine meekness. He was true, firm, and noble. He sought to live
in peace with all, while he was unbending as the lofty cedar wherever principle was involved. In
everything that did not come in collision with his allegiance to God, he was respectful and
obedient to those who had authority over him; but he had so high a sense of the claims of God

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 51 of 369

that the requirements of earthly rulers were held subordinate. He would not be induced by any
selfish consideration to swerve from his duty.” The Sanctified Life, p. 20

The issues involved in the final conflict will be the same: God’s law and worship (compare Daniel
3 and 6).

A death decree was proclaimed against Daniel and will be proclaimed against God’s people (see
Revelation 13:15).

Daniel and his friends went through a severe time of trouble and trial but came through
victoriously as will God’s faithful remnant at the end of time (Revelation 15:2; Daniel 12:1).

Daniel was hated by the religious leaders of his day as will happen with the remnant at the end
of time (see notes on Daniel 3).

Daniel denounced the placing of unholy wine in holy vessels. The same will happen at the end
(Daniel 5; Revelation 17:4, 5).

Daniel was in an insignificant faithful minority while the majority was in apostasy. The same will
be true at the end.

Daniel and his friends were delivered from their enemies and their enemies were destroyed with
the very weapons they intended to use on God’s people. The furnace slew those who threw the
three young men in. The lions ate those who prepared the plot against Daniel. Evil Haman died
in the gallows he had built for Mordeccai. At the end, the weapons which were to slay God’s
people will be used to slay the ministers who plotted against them (see The Great Controversy,
pp. 655, 656).

The bottom line is that Daniel had four main characteristics which the remnant will possess at
the end: 1) He had the testimony of Jesus, 2) He kept the commandments of God, 3) He was a
staunch worshiper of the true God, 4) He had the faith of Jesus—an unbreakable confidence and
trust in God just like Jesus did (Revelation 12:17; 14:12 for the end time application).

At the end, God’s people will gain the victory in the four areas in which Daniel and his friends
were victorious:
1. God’s people will not drink the wine of Babylon nor eat her food. The food and the wine represent
Babylon’s false doctrines and traditions (see John 4:34; John 6:63; Revelation 18:2, 3; John 6:51-
58; Isaiah 4:1; 55:2, 10, 11).
2. God’s people will refuse the name of the beast (Revelation 13:17; 15:2-4). In fact, they will have
the name of God on their foreheads just as Daniel and his friends had godly names (Revelation
14:1).
3. God’s people will not flinch at the false god of end time Babylon. Though all power will appear to
be on Babylon’s side, though God’s people will be a small minority, He will deliver them because
He is the King of kings and Lord of lords (see Revelation 13:4; 17:14; Daniel 11:44; 12:1).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 52 of 369

4. God’s people will refuse to be brainwashed by the false theories and traditions of Babylon (see
Revelation 16:13, 14; 17:1-5).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 53 of 369

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 54 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #7 – NOTES ON DANIEL 2

Chapters 1 and 2 of Daniel are linked by the last verse of chapter one. The fact that Daniel was
given wisdom in all visions and dreams prepares us for the experience in Daniel 2. In chapter one
Daniel and his friends passed the test while the wise men failed. In chapter 2 Daniel and his
friends passed the test with flying colors while the wise men failed the test. This indicates clearly
that the God of Daniel was superior to the God of Babylon (see Genesis 41:24 for the parallel in
the story of Joseph).

Basic Elements of Historicism

 While the apocalyptic chain prophecies of Daniel do not repeat, the stories in the
historical section do, but on a global and spiritual scale.
 Historicism is better called the historical flow method.
 The broad sweep of the historical flow method covers from the days in which the prophet
wrote till the end of time.
 There are no gaps or parentheses in the historical flow.
 The final war will be fought on the battlefield of hermeneutics. The war will be between
futurism and historicism.

Play and Counterplay

In Daniel 2 we find a play and counterplay of events between God and Satan. I like to compare
the movements of history with a game of chess. On one side of the table is seated God while on
the other is seated Satan. God moves and then Satan countermoves and so the game goes on.
The comforting news is that there is no chance that God will lose because he already knows all
of Satan’s moves before the game began. On the other hand, Satan must take calculated guesses
about how God is going to move and when you have to guess you are bound to make mistakes.

“In the annals of human history the growth of nations, the rise and fall of empires, appear as
dependent on the will and prowess of man. The shaping of events seems, to a great degree, to be
determined by his power, ambition, or caprice. But in the word of God the curtain is drawn aside,
and we behold, behind, above, and through all the play and counterplay of human interests and

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 55 of 369

power and passions, the agencies of the all-merciful One, silently, patiently working out the
counsels of His own will.” Education, p. 173

 Daniel 2:29: God knew that the king was thinking about the future of his kingdom when
he went to bed.
 Daniel 2:1: God gave him a dream to answer his concerns about the future.
 Daniel 2:3: God then veiled the dream from the king’s memory. Why did God do this?
 Daniel 2:10: God knew that the king would call the experts who were immersed in the
occult. God wanted to unmask the false religion of Babylon and clearly reveal that occult
methods don’t work.
 This story clearly shows that Satan cannot read the mind. I am sure that he was dying to
tell the astrologers the dream and its meaning so that all would believe that the religion
of Babylon was true.

“Satan cannot read our thoughts, but he can see our actions, hear our words; and from his long
knowledge of the human family, he can shape his temptations to take advantage of our weak
points of character.” Review and Herald, February 27, 1913

 Deuteronomy 18:9-12: God had forbidden occult practices. All of these methods mentioned in
Deuteronomy are based on wrong understanding of the state of the dead.

God Communicates
 Daniel 2:11: the wise men complained that only their gods could reveal the dream to the king but
they did not dwell with flesh. The gods of the pagans conceal their plans.
 John 1:14: In contrast to the gods of the pagans, the God of the Bible becomes flesh and
communicates His will to human beings through Jesus.

Satan Plans to kill God’s followers but instead they are brought to
prominence in the kingdom
 Daniel 2:12, 13: Satan took advantage of the situation and influenced the mind of the king to kill
all of the wise men of Babylon.
 Satan had seen the faithfulness of Daniel and his friends to God in Daniel 1. He knew that these
young men would be a potential problem for him and so he decided to wipe them out.
 Instead of being successful in wiping them out, Daniel and his friends were brought to
prominence in the kingdom and given cabinet positions.

God’s method of revealing the future

Amos 3:7: God does nothing in human history without revealing His secrets to His servants the
prophets. Here once again we are faced with the fact that the God of the Bible wishes to
communicate His will to His creatures.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 56 of 369

Daniel 2:17-19: God showed that He was in control by revealing the dream and its meaning to
Daniel. God did not instruct Daniel to consult the crystal ball, the signs of the zodiac, the psychics,
the channelers or the necromancers. God revealed the secret when Daniel and his friends
prayed!!

Isaiah 46:9, 10: The true God is distinguished from all false gods by the fact that He knows the
end from the beginning.

Daniel 2:27, 28: Daniel did not claim the credit. It was God who revealed the secret and it was
God who got the credit.

The Dream

 Daniel 2:31-35: The outline of the dream.

 History is not evolving but rather devolving as can be seen by the decreasing value of the
metals. History is not evolving toward a golden age created by the ingenuity of man but
rather devolving into a state of confusion and chaos.
 While the metals decrease in value, they increase in strength:

“The image revealed to Nebuchadnezzar, while representing the deterioration of the

kingdoms of the earth in power and glory, also fitly represents the deterioration of
religion and morality among the people of these kingdoms. As nations forget God, in like
proportion they become weak morally.” 4 Bible Commentary, p. 1168
 The lack of moral value in the nations leads them to impose morality by force.
 All kingdoms will fall but the kingdom of God will embrace the entire earth and will last
forever.

The Meaning of the Dream

 Daniel 2:37, 38: Babylon is the head of gold. It ruled from 605 to 539 BC.
 Daniel 2:39: The next kingdom was Medo-Persia which ruled from 539 to 331 BC. We
don’t even need to read in the history books to know this. Daniel 5 clearly points out the
fact that the kingdom of Babylon was followed by the Medes and Persians.
 The third kingdom was Greece. This kingdom ruled from 331 to 168 BC. Once again, it is
not even necessary to go to the history books to discover that Medo-Persia was followed
by Greece. Daniel 8 makes it clear that the kingdom that followed the Medes and Persians
was Greece.
 Daniel 2:40: The fourth kingdom was the Roman Empire and Rome ruled from 168 BC to
476 AD. That Rome was the fourth power is clearly seen in Revelation 12. Notably, this
kingdom is called “the Iron monarchy of Rome” by historian Edward Gibbon in his six
volume series, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 57 of 369

  Daniel 2:41: 168BC-476 AD The Roman Empire was divided into Ten kingdoms as a result
of the barbarian invasions. Still iron in the feet but a different kind of Rome. An
amalgamated Rome. Same territory but different type of kingdom.

The Feet

 The iron that existed in the legs continues in the feet. This indicates that Rome continues
its existence in the feet but it is a different kind of Rome, an amalgamated Rome with
two elements that don’t belong together.
 The feet of the image take us all the way from the year 476 AD to the second coming of
Christ so they cannot represent merely the nations of Western Europe.
 The papacy has two stages of dominion, one in Europe during the 1260 years and the
other in the whole world when the deadly wound is healed. The final fulfillment of the
feet stage of the image is foretold in Revelation 17 when the kings of the earth will be of
one mind for a short period of time.
 The clay is of a very special type; it is potter’s clay (Daniel 2:41).
 In the LXX the word for clay is ostrakinon. Ostraca were pieces of potter’s clay vessels that
had broken.
 The potter’s clay is fragile (Daniel 2:42). In Romans 9:20, 21 the apostle Paul describes
the fragility of man as the fragility of potter’s clay. The iron is described as strong (Daniel
2:40). Because the clay is fragile it desires to unite with an element that is stronger in
order to subsist in a contentious world. The clay wishes to join together with something
that is strong in order to survive.
 The iron and the clay each have their place and legitimate function separately. It is only
when they are mingled that both are weakened.
 Daniel 2 is presenting God’s perspective of history. In the sight of God, the union of the
iron and the clay is an illegitimate union and therefore not a true union at all.
 In Daniel 2 all is symbolic: the gold, the silver, the bronze, the iron, the Stone and the
mountain. Therefore, the potter’s clay must also be symbolic.

Meaning of the Potter’s Clay

Jeremiah 18:1-6: The potter’s clay is used to represent Israel, God’s Old Testament church.

“The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying: 2 "Arise and go down to the potter's
house, and there I will cause you to hear My words." 3 Then I went down to the potter's house,
and there he was, making something at the wheel. 4 And the vessel that he made of clay was
marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to
the potter to make. 5 Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 6 "O house of Israel, can I not
do with you as this potter?" says the Lord. "Look, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are you in
My hand, O house of Israel!”
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 58 of 369
Revelation 12 makes it clear that God’s Old Testament church is one with the New Testament
church. God does not have two mutually separable peoples. Only one woman is used to
symbolize both stages of God’s church. The woman that brings the Messiah into the world is the
same as the one who later flees into the wilderness for 1260 years. Thus it would be legitimate
to affirm that God’s Old Testament church or people is represented by the potter’s clay. God
formed his church at Mt. Sinai. As a result of apostasy, Israel was taken into Babylonian captivity
(the marring of the vessel). But after the captivity God once again established Israel in their land
(the making of another vessel).

Genesis 2:7 affirms that Jesus formed man’s literal body out of dust the dust of the ground:

“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground. . .”

Isaiah 64:8 (see also Job 33:6; 13:12) informs us that God worked as a potter and formed our
bodies out of clay:

“But now, O Lord, You are our Father; we are the clay, and You our potter; and all we are the
work of Your hand.”

The literal body that God formed out of clay was perfect and had all of its body parts, each created
to fulfill a certain function. But the body was lifeless.

God then breathed into the body the spirit of life and the body lived and all the body parts began
to fulfill the function for which they were created:

Genesis 2:7: “. . . and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.”

In Daniel 2 we are not dealing with literal realities but rather with spiritual ones. In other words,
the potter’s clay that God uses to create the body is not literal but symbolic. The question is:
What is represented by the creation of the literal body?

Colossians 1:18 tells us that the church is the body of Christ. In other words, the creation of man’s
literal body represents the creation of Christ’s spiritual body—the church.

“And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead,
that in all things He may have the preeminence.”

Immediately before the death of Christ, the apostles were intensely divided. They were all striving
to occupy the first positions in Christ’s future kingdom. They were like a bunch of body parts
strewn all over the place. But in Acts 2:1 we are told that the body of Christ was joined together
in one accord. All the members now belonged to the same body but each member was created
to fulfill a different function:

“When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 59 of 369

Though the church had been formed and was united, something was yet missing. The Spirit of
life needed to energize the body so that each member could fulfill its specific function. On the
day of Pentecost, the Spirit entered the body of Christ:

Acts 2:2-4: “And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it
filled the whole house where they were sitting. 3 Then there appeared to them divided tongues,
as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began
to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.”

This metaphor of the body is used by the apostle Paul to refer to the church. The body is one,
and the members fulfill their function because they are all energized by the Holy Spirit:

I Corinthians 12:12, 13: “For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of
that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized
into one body — whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free — and have all been made to
drink into one Spirit.”

Ezekiel 37:10-11: The Babylonian captivity tore Israel apart but after the captivity all the
members of the body come together and then the Spirit of life entered them. This represents
the people of God in the Old Testament.

“So I prophesied as He commanded me, and breath came into them, and they lived, and stood
upon their feet, an exceedingly great army. 11 Then He said to me, "Son of man, these bones are
the whole house of Israel. They indeed say: 'Our bones are dry, our hope is lost, and we ourselves
are cut off!'”

It is safe to conclude that the potter’s clay symbolizes God’s church. That is to say, during the foot
stage of the image the political power of Rome would continue (the iron) but it would be mixed
with the church (the clay). This is exactly what happened during the period of papal dominion.

The church of the feet stage felt that it had to unite with the state in order to guarantee its
continuing existence. What the church failed to realize is that this illegitimate union weakened
both the church and the state. The church should have realized that the guarantee of her
continued existence is found in the protection of the One who molded her into existence. The
strength of the church does not reside in using the power of the political systems of the world.
Her power resides in fulfilling her mission of preaching the gospel to the world by the power of
the Holy Spirit. What God is saying in Daniel 2 is: “What God has cast asunder, let no man join
together.” The church’s only legitimate union is with her husband, Jesus Christ. When she joins
the state she is committing fornication. Fornication in the sight of God is not union at all!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 60 of 369

Daniel 2, Daniel 7 and Revelation 13

The ten toes of the image reappear again in Daniel 7 and Revelation 13 but with a different
symbolism. While in Daniel 2 the clay is added to the iron in the ten toes of the feet, in Daniel 7
the little horn arises among the ten horns of the fourth beast:

Ten Toes Clay (religious power)

Ten Horns Little Horn (religious power)

The legs of iron and the ten toes of the image and the dragon beast and its ten horns represent
the same political kingdoms. But as Daniel saw clay added to the iron in the feet he now sees a
little horn rise from the head of the fourth beast among the ten horns. As the clay was radically
different than the metals that preceded it, so this horn is radically different than the beasts and
the horns that preceded it. The text clearly indicates that this horn leaned on the political power
of the fourth beast to carry on activities that were religious in character. It spoke blasphemy
against the Most High, persecuted the saints of the Most High and thought that it could change
God’s times and Law. The little horn in Daniel 8 also had strong religious characteristics: It
trampled on God’s sanctuary, attacked the Prince of the host, removed the daily and set up the
abomination of desolation. The apostle Paul even described the audacity of this power as it sat
in the temple of God claiming to be God.

In Revelation 13 we once again see how the little horn combined the political power of Rome
with religious activities. In Revelation 13:2 we are told that the dragon beast (the fourth beast
of Daniel 7, the legs of iron in Daniel 2) gave its authority, throne and power to the beast (the
little horn, the clay). The beast then carried on a religious warfare against God by blaspheming
his name, His tabernacle and those who dwell in heaven. The beast also persecutes the saints. It
is obvious that this was a religio-political power.

The Feet and Revelation 17

The final fulfillment of the feet of the image is found in Revelation 17. In this chapter we once
again encounter a dragon like beast that has ten horns. The ten horns are parallel the ten toes of
the image and the ten horns of the dragon like beast in Daniel 7. But the ten horns in Daniel 7
and Revelation 13 represent the history of the church during the 1260 years (as denoted by the
time periods in Daniel 7:25 and Revelation 13:5). The ten horns in Revelation 17 on the other
hand will be fulfilled when the deadly wound of the beast is healed. In Revelation 17 the ten
horns are universalized to include the kings of the earth and the whole world (Revelation 16:13,
14, 16; 17:2, 12, 13, 17; 13:3).

It is significant that these kings not only join hands politically. There is a religious power that
manipulates them and uses them for its own ends. Revelation 17 portrays a great harlot who is
seated on many waters and fornicates with the kings of the earth (Revelation 14:8; 17:2; 18:3,
9). She gives wine to the nations and kills the saints of the Most High. This is the picture of the
end time apostate church that will link up with the kings of the world to establish a New
World Order on earth created by the power and prowess of man. But this union is not a union at

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 61 of 369

all in the sight of God because it is illegitimate. When a man commits adultery with a woman
there is union but in the sight of God there is no union because God has not united them. The
apparent union of the harlot with the kings will fall apart when the waters of the Euphrates dry
up and the kings of the earth hate the harlot (Revelation 17:16). Jesus will then come as King of
kings and Lord of lords (Revelation 17:14). This kingdom will be established without hands
because it will be established by Christ.

Revelation 17:1, 2: Presents the same mixture but with different symbols. The great harlot
represents an apostate church. How did she become apostate? The answer is: By fornicating with
the kings of the earth. Thus the mixture of the iron with the clay represents the same truth as
the harlot fornicating with the kings of the earth.

“Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me,
‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters, 2 with whom
the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were made drunk
with the wine of her fornication.’”

Ellen White’s Perspective

“We have come to a time when God's sacred work is represented by the feet of the image in which
the iron was mixed with the miry clay. God has a people, a chosen people, whose discernment
must be sanctified, who must not become unholy by laying upon the foundation wood, hay, and
stubble. Every soul who is loyal to the commandments of God will see that the distinguishing
feature of our faith is the seventh-day Sabbath. If the government would honor the Sabbath as
God has commanded, it would stand in the strength of God and in defense of the faith once
delivered to the saints. But statesmen will uphold the spurious sabbath, and will mingle their
religious faith with the observance of this child of the papacy, placing it above the Sabbath which
the Lord has sanctified and blessed, setting it apart for man to keep holy, as a sign between Him
and His people to a thousand generations. The mingling of churchcraft and statecraft is
represented by the iron and the clay. This union is weakening all the power of the churches. This
investing the church with the power of the state will bring evil results. Men have almost passed
the point of God's forbearance. They have invested their strength in politics, and have united
with the papacy. But the time will come when God will punish those who have made void His law,
and their evil work will recoil upon themselves (Manuscript 63, 1899). Seventh-day Adventist
Bible Commentary, Volume 4 p. 1168

“Earthly powers are shaken. We need not, and cannot, expect union among the nations of the
earth. Our position in the image of Nebuchadnezzar is represented by the toes, in a divided state,
and of a crumbling material, that will not hold together.” Testimonies for the Church, Volume 1
p. 361

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 62 of 369

The Stone

What is represented by the Stone that struck the image on its feet?

The answer is that in the Old Testament the stone clearly has messianic undertones as can be
seen in Isaiah 28:16; 8:14, 15; Psalm 118:22. In the New Testament Jesus applied this stone
terminology to Himself. (Matthew 21:42-44; Luke 20:18; Acts 4:11; I Peter 2:4-8)

I Peter 2:6: The stone is placed in the mountain and the mountain is Zion.

“Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture, ‘Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect,
precious, and he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.’”

Luke 20:18: In this verse Jesus seems to be alluding to the prophecy of Daniel 2 and applying it
to individuals:

“Whoever falls on that stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder."

Not Made with Hands

What does the expression ‘not with hands’ mean?

A comparison of Daniel 2:34; 8:25 and 11:45 indicate that the expression ‘without hands’ means
‘without human intervention.’ In other words, the end of human history will be brought about
by the supernatural irruption of God into human history. This is in contrast to the concept which
was originated by St. Augustine and developed by Roman Catholicism where the stone represents
the church taking over the world and establishing God’s kingdom here.

Hebrews 9:11: “But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and
more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.”

Mark 14:58: "We heard Him say: 'I will destroy this temple made with hands, [the body he
received from Mary] and within three days I will build another made without hands [His
supernatural resurrected body].'"

The Mountain that Fills the whole Earth

Revelation 17:9, 10 (Jeremiah 51:25); Isaiah 2:1-5: In Scripture mountains represent kingdoms.

The mountain in Daniel 2 is symbolic of the everlasting kingdom that will fill the whole earth.
This can be seen clearly by comparing Daniel 2:34, 35 with 2:44:

Daniel 2:34, 35: “You watched while a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image
on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the
silver, and the gold were crushed together, and became like chaff from the summer threshing
floors; the wind carried them away so that no trace of them was found. And the stone that struck
the image became a great mountain and filled the whole earth.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 63 of 369

Daniel 2:44: “And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall
never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and
consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.”

Daniel 2:45: The Mountain is Zion which represents the everlasting kingdom of Jesus that will fill
the whole earth (Isaiah 9:6, 7) “‘Inasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain
without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold
— the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass after this. The dream is
certain, and its interpretation is sure.’”

Daniel 7:26, 27: An everlasting kingdom given to Jesus and then the saints.

Final Call

Matthew 21:44: Whoever falls upon the rock and is converted will be broken but whoever does
not will be ground to powder: “‘And whoever falls on this stone will be broken; but on whomever
it falls, it will grind him to powder.’”

Matthew 3:11, 12: We must allow the Holy Spirit as fire to consume sin in us. If we don’t allow
the fire to consume sin then the fire will consume us: 11“I indeed baptize you with water unto
repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to
carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 “His winnowing fan is in His hand, and
He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will
burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire."

John 3:3, 5: Unless we are born again we cannot see or enter the kingdom of God.

“Jesus answered and said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot
see the kingdom of God."… 5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of
water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

Review and Meaning

 The world is not spiraling out of control. God sits on His throne and guides world events.
 Everything in this prophecy has been fulfilled precisely as God has announced and
therefore we can be sure that the final event will also be fulfilled
 We are in the toenails of human history.
 The next great event in history is the second coming of Christ

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 64 of 369

 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #8 – NOTES ON DANIEL 3

Beast, Image, Number: Old Testament Background

Babylon was the ruling power in the world of the time (Daniel 3:1) “Nebuchadnezzar the king
made an image of gold, whose height was sixty cubits and its width six cubits. He set it up in the
plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon.”

Connection between Daniel 2 and 3

 God had delineated in Daniel 2 the sequence of kingdoms that would arise between the
days of Nebuchadnezzar and the second coming of Jesus.
 Nebuchadnezzar did not like the scenario that God had presented and he attempted to
change God’s prophetic scenario.
 This idea came from the religious leaders.
“The wise men of his realm, taking advantage of this and of his return to idolatry, proposed
that he make an image similar to the one seen in his dream, and set it up where all might
behold the head of gold, which had been interpreted as representing his kingdom.”
Prophets and Kings, p. 504.
 The word “gold” in Daniel 2 and 3 links the chapters.
 The word “image” is identical in both chapters.
 The expression “set up” is repeatedly used in the chapter.
 Remember that in Daniel 2:44 God had stated that He was going to “set up” his
indestructible kingdom (Daniel 3:1, 2, 3, 7, 12, 14, 15 and 18). Nebuchadnezzar attempted
to counteract God’s scenario by setting up an image totally of gold!

“Instead of reproducing the image as he had seen it, he would excel the original. His image should
not deteriorate in value from the head to the feet, but should be entirely of gold--symbolic
throughout of Babylon as an eternal, indestructible, all-powerful kingdom, which should break in
pieces all other kingdoms and stand forever.” Prophets and Kings, p. 504

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 65 of 369

“And it is not surprising that in a land where idol worship was of universal prevalence, the
beautiful and priceless image in the plain of Dura, representing the glory of Babylon and its
magnificence and power, should be consecrated as an object of worship. This was accordingly
provided for, and a decree went forth that on the day of the dedication all should show their
supreme loyalty to the Babylonian power by bowing before the image. Prophets and Kings, pp.
505, 506

But the image was not only a sign of the indestructible and eternal nature of Babylon. To bow
before the image was not only a sign of allegiance to the civil power like pledging allegiance to
the flag. The image was really a religious symbol of loyalty to the Babylonian pantheon. Thus the
king bellowed out to the three young Hebrews:

Daniel 3:14: "Is it true, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego, that you do not serve my gods or
worship the gold image which I have set up?

God’s people were captive in Babylon (Jeremiah 51:45)

"My people go out of the midst of her! And let everyone deliver himself from the fierce anger of
the Lord.”

Nebuchadnezzar for a time lived as a beast (Daniel 4:16)

“Let his [Nebuchadnezzar’s] heart be changed from that of a man, let him be given the heart of a
beast, and let seven times pass over him.”

The religious leaders of Babylon enticed Nebuchadnezzar to set up an image in his honor.
Repeatedly Daniel 3 quotes Nebuchadnezzar using the expression ‘which I have set up’ (Daniel
3:1, 2, 3 [2x], 5, 7, 12, 14, 18).

The dimensions of the image: 60x6 (3:1)

“Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold, whose height was sixty cubits and its width
six cubits [90 feet tall and 9 feet wide]. He set it up in the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon.”

“Babylonian mathematics was based on the sexagesimal system, in which the basic counting units
were the numbers 6 and 60. (The sexagesimal system has been accepted universally for the
measurement of arcs and angles and for divisions of time.” Ranko Stefanovic, Revelation of Jesus
Christ, p. 417

 If what Herodotus says is correct, the image weighed 800 talents of gold which would be
equivalent to over 30 tons (Daniel 3:1). In antiquity gold was called ‘the dew of the sun’
because it was believed that it had dripped down from the sun onto the earth. Gold was
used to represent the sun god because gold is the color of the sun.
 Sexagesimal system originated in Babylon (the number system based on the number 6—
60 seconds, 60 minutes, 24 hours, 360 days, 360 degrees).
 If we multiply 60 x 6 the total is 360 which was a very sacred number in Babylon.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 66 of 369

 360 degrees and 360 days represent the full cycle of time and the full circle of space.
 Thirty-six gods were placed to rule over the Babylonian pantheon. Each ruled over 10
degrees of space and 10 days of time.
 When the numbers from 1-36 are added in sequence the total is 666 and the number 666
was known as “the great number of the sun.” All the gods were included in this one
summary number. In Babylon the sun god was called Marduk. He was thought of as the
absolute ruler of all time and all space.
 The Babylonian priestly system expressed this belief in practical terms by wearing
amulets or medallions around their necks.
 The medallions [Sigilla solis] were made of pure gold because gold is the color of the sun.
It is no coincidence that in Isaiah 14:4 Babylon is called the golden kingdom and that in
Daniel 2 Babylon is represented by the head of gold. The medallions or amulets were
circular (like the sun) and had a hexagon within the amulet.
 On the obverse (front) side of the amulet there was a large square with 36 smaller
squares within. In each of the smaller squares there was a number from 1-36 and beneath
the large square was the number 666.
 On the reverse side of the seal or amulet there was a raging lion with eagle’s wings
(yellow in color like the sun) whose mane is portrayed as the rays of the sun (see Malachi
4:2 where the sun is portrayed as having wings). It is no coincidence that Babylon is
portrayed as a lion in Daniel 7 and that sphinxes were at each of the entrances to the
city.
 Later Gnostic amulets, following the religion of ancient Babylon, combine the number 666
with a lion. The mane of the lion is portrayed as the rays of the sun. Our glyph # 6 is
actually the sign of a coiled serpent and had its origin in ancient India. It is really the sign
of a coiled cobra and in many Romantic languages the sound of the number six reminds
us of the hiss of the serpent!
 In astrology, Leo, the lion, rules over the hottest period of the year (July 23-August 22).
 Babylon is the king of kingdoms, the sun is the king of heavenly bodies, gold is the king of
precious metals, the eagle is the king of birds and the # 666 is the king of numbers.
 The Romans acquired much of their religious system from Babylon but they established
a different number system. They chose six letters from their Latin alphabet and gave
each a numerical value. The sum total of all six numbers is 666.
 Thus the number 666 is to be identified with Babylon and with Rome (also called Babylon
in I Peter 5:13).
 Thus those who worshipped the image would be honoring Babylon and worshiping the
sun god whose number is 666.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 67 of 369

The primary issue in this controversy was worship

 The question was who will you worship: the image or the true God (Daniel 3:28).

“Nebuchadnezzar spoke, saying, "Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-
Nego, who sent His Angel and delivered His servants who trusted in Him, and they have
frustrated the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they should not serve nor worship
any god except their own God!”

 This word is used 11 times in the chapter (3:5-7, 10-12, 14, 15, 18, 28).
 The law of God is also involved, primarily the first table which has to do with worship to
the true God.
 We worship God because He is the Creator (Psalm 95:6) and the sign of worship to the
Creator is the Sabbath (Revelation 14:7).

There was a union of church and state (Daniel 3:2)

 “And King Nebuchadnezzar sent word to gather together the satraps, the administrators,
the governors, the counselors, the treasurers, the judges, the magistrates, and all the
officials of the provinces, to come to the dedication of the image which King
Nebuchadnezzar had set up.”
 Notice all the political rulers who were present and in order of rank. All the civil powers
of the Babylonian world were present there for this religious celebration.
 The government was enforcing a religious decree. To refuse to worship was considered
high treason against the government.
 The story of Daniel 3 illustrates what happens when the civil power seeks to establish
religion. Daniel 6 will illustrate what happens when the civil power attempts to forbid the
free exercise of religion.

The decree to worship was universal (Daniel 3:4)

 Representatives from all the nations of the day were present for this religious celebration
enforced by the state. All the great political leaders of the day were present and bowed
before the image (see Daniel 3:2, 3, 7). The expression ‘peoples, nations and languages is
reminiscent of Revelation 17:15.
 “Then a herald cried aloud: "To you it is commanded, O peoples, nations, and languages...”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 68 of 369

Time and again the chapter emphasizes that music played a significant
role in connection with false worship (Daniel 3:5, 7, 10 and 15). So to
speak, everyone was expected to dance to Babylon’s tune:

 "To you it is commanded, O peoples, nations, and languages, 5 that at the time you hear
the sound of the horn, flute, harp, lyre, and psaltery, in symphony with all kinds of music,
you shall fall down and worship the gold image that King Nebuchadnezzar has set up. . .“

A death decree was given against those who did not worship the image
of the beast (Daniel 3:6, 11, 15 and 19)

 “. . . and whoever does not fall down and worship shall be cast immediately into the midst
of a burning fiery furnace."

There was an insignificant yet faithful remnant that refused to worship

the image of the beast (Daniel 3:12). If the king could eradicate this
remnant, his triumph would be complete

 “There are certain Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon:
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego; these men, O king, have not paid due regard to you.
They do not serve your gods or worship the gold image which you have set up."

The religious leaders accused the three young men to the civil power
(Daniel 2:2, 4, 5, 10, 12; 3:9-12)

 “Therefore at that time certain Chaldeans came forward and accused the Jews. . . There
are certain Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon: Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abed-Nego; these men, O king, have not paid due regard to you. They do
not serve your gods or worship the gold image which you have set up."
 The Chaldeans were the religious leaders of Babylon, the priestly caste. These religious
leaders hated God’s remnant because of their religious convictions.

There was a shaking in the Valley of Dura (Daniel 1:3)

 When Nebuchadnezzar took Daniel and his three friends captive to Babylon he left King
Zedekiah to rule in Jerusalem. In 2 Kings 24:14-17 we are told that the king ‘. . . carried
into captivity all Jerusalem: all the captains and all the mighty men of valor, ten thousand
captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths.’
 Would not Zedekiah be expected to be present at the dedication? We know that in the
year 594 BC (Jeremiah 51:59) King Zedekiah made a trip to Babylon. Was it to worship
the image?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 69 of 369

  Furthermore, there were other Hebrew youth who were placed in governmental
positions when Daniel and his friends were taken to Babylon. Is it just possible that they
bowed before the image?

Nebuchadnezzar attempted to intimidate the remnant who kept the

commandments of God and worshipped only Him (Daniel 3:15)

 The king’s strategy consisted in three steps: Fascination, intimidation, annihilation.

Everything in the story of Daniel 3 sought to ‘wow’ the senses. The music, the majestic
image, the presence of the political leaders from all over the world the peer pressure,
were all meant to mesmerize those who were present for the dedication of the image.
When the Hebrew worthies were unwilling to be hypnotized by the majesty of the
occasion, the king sought to use intimidation and threats. When the threats did not work,
the king resorted to the final solution: Annihilation!
 The king roared as he said to the faithful remnant: Daniel 3:15: “And who is the god who
will deliver you from my hands?"
 Ellen White makes a very insightful remark about the body language of the king when he
spoke these words. She says that he spoke them “with hand stretched upward in
defiance”. (Signs of the Times, May 6, 1897)

The answer of the faithful remnant was respectful yet firm (Daniel 3:16-
18)

 “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego answered and said to the king, "O Nebuchadnezzar,
we have no need to answer you in this matter. 17 If that is the case, our God whom we
serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will deliver us from your
hand, O king. 18 But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we do not serve your gods,
nor will we worship the gold image which you have set up."

The king’s rage (Daniel 3:19)

The reaction of the king is noteworthy:

Daniel 3:19: “Then Nebuchadnezzar was full of fury, and the expression on his face changed
toward Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego. He spoke and commanded that they heat the
furnace seven times more than it was usually heated.”

 Ellen White vividly describes the face of Nebuchadnezzar after the young men spoke:
“Satanic attributes made his countenance appear as the countenance of a demon.”
Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Volume 4 p. 1169

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 70 of 369

  God would shortly answer this charge: “I will deliver them.” The Husband would protect
his bride, the Shepherd would protect his sheep, the Head would care for the body and
the Sovereign would keep his covenant with His servants.
 The same mistake was made by Pharaoh. He had said: “I do not know Yahweh and I will
not let His people go.’ He challenged the God of heaven and the Lord fought for Israel
and delivered them.

Time of trouble for the three young men (Daniel 3:20-23)

 They faced the beast, his image and the civil rulers and the death decree without
flinching. There was no human way to survive.

Furnace heated seven times hotter (3:19)

 The number 7 indicates that the furnace was heated to the maximum heat because the
number 7 represents totality or completeness. This was a manifestation of the fullness of
the king’s wrath.
 The furnace represents affliction by which God purifies his people (Isaiah 48:10, 11;
Psalm 12:6; 13:12; Job 23:10; Isaiah 33:14-16; Malachi 3:2, 3; Revelation 3:18). The faith
of the three worthies was severely tested but they came forth as pure gold. Their faith
was also a witness that brought honor and glory to the true God before the all the nations
of the world.
 The young men claimed the promise of Isaiah 43:2.
 The young men did not form their character in the crisis. Their character was exhibited in
the crisis. Their faithfulness in Daniel 1 in the small things prepared them to pass greater
tests.

Their tormentors died instead (Daniel 3:22)

Christ Himself stood up to deliver His faithful remnant in the midst of

the time of trouble (Daniel 3:25)

"Look!" he answered, "I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire; and they are not hurt,
and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God."

“As His witnesses were cast into the furnace, the Savior revealed Himself to them in person, and
together they walked in the midst of the fire.” Prophets and Kings , pp. 508, 509

 Notice that the king described the Son of God as an Angel, that is, Michael the Archangel
(Daniel 3:25, 28) or the Angel of the LORD.
 How did the king know what the Son of God looked like: Ellen White responds:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 71 of 369

 “The Hebrew captives had told Nebuchadnezzar of Christ, the Redeemer that was to come, and
from the description thus given the king recognized the form of the fourth in the fiery furnace as
the Son of God.” Christ Triumphant, p. 178

 The Hebrew worthies went through the tribulation but they were shielded by divine
power (Daniel 3:24-27).
 Christ is the Hero of this story, not the young men!!

The word ‘deliver’ is used in certain strategic parts of the chapter (3:15,
17, 28, 29)

 “Now if you are ready at the time you hear the sound of the horn, flute, harp, lyre, and
psaltery, in symphony with all kinds of music, and you fall down and worship the image
which I have made, good! But if you do not worship, you shall be cast immediately into
the midst of a burning fiery furnace. And who is the god who will deliver you from my
hands?"
 “If that is the case, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery
furnace, and He will deliver us from your hand, O king.”
 “Nebuchadnezzar spoke, saying, "Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-
Nego, who sent His Angel and delivered His servants who trusted in Him, and they have
frustrated the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they should not serve nor worship
any god except their own God!”
 “Therefore I make a decree that any people, nation, or language which speaks anything
amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego shall be cut in pieces, and
their houses shall be made an ash heap; because there is no other God who can deliver
like this."

An Important Principle

Literal Israel was literally captive in literal Babylon, the literal king behaved like a literal beast,
set up a literal image, commanding everyone to literally bow and worship it; literal Jews refused
to literally bow and therefore were thrown into a literal fiery furnace and were delivered from
the literal flames. But in the end time application that which was literal and local in the Old
Testament story will be worldwide and spiritual at the end of time.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 72 of 369

The power which will rule the world in the end-time will be spiritual and
global Babylon (Revelation 14:8; 16:12-16, 19; 17:1, 2, 5, 18, 21)

 Babylon will once again present a counterfeit prophetic scenario wanting to establish a
new world order different than the new world order which Jesus has promised to
establish.
 The arrogance of Babylon in the end time will be no less than in the days of Daniel. In
Revelation 18:7 end time Babylon boasts: 'I sit as queen, and [I] am no widow, and will
not see sorrow.' In Isaiah 47:7 Babylon boasts: ‘I shall be a lady forever’. And in verse 8
she blasphemously claims the title that belongs only to Yahweh, the great ‘I AM: 'I am,
and there is no one else besides me; I shall not sit as a widow, nor shall I know the loss of
children’.
 At the very end of human history, the Papacy, apostate Protestantism and the kings of
the earth will unite to establish a New World Order such as was envisioned by the builders
of the Tower of Babel (see Genesis 11:1-9).
 The second coming of Jesus as the solution to the world’s problems will be cast aside and
men will attempt to establish a golden age on earth that will stand forever:

“Papists, who boast of miracles as a certain sign of the true church, will be readily deceived
by this wonder-working power; and Protestants, having cast away the shield of truth, will
also be deluded. Papists, Protestants, and worldlings will alike accept the form of
godliness without the power, and they will see in this union a grand movement for the
conversion of the world and the ushering in of the long-expected millennium.” The Great
Controversy, pp. 588, 589

God’s people will once again be captive in Babylon and this is the reason
they are called to come out of her (Revelation 18:4)

 “And I heard another voice from heaven saying: "Come out of her, my people, lest you
share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues.”
 “Of Babylon, at the time brought to view in this prophecy, it is declared: "Her sins have
reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities." Revelation 18:5. She has
filled up the measure of her guilt, and destruction is about to fall upon her. But God still
has a people in Babylon; and before the visitation of His judgments these faithful ones
must be called out, that they partake not of her sins and "receive not of her plagues."
Hence the movement symbolized by the angel coming down from heaven, lightening the
earth with his glory and crying mightily with a strong voice, announcing.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 73 of 369

  The sins of Babylon. In connection with his message the call is heard: "Come out of her,
My people." These announcements, uniting with the third angel's message, constitute the
final warning to be given to the inhabitants of the earth.” The Great Controversy, p. 604

In Revelation there is a power which is described as the beast and the

beast is a symbol of the Roman Catholic Papacy (Revelation 13:2)

 “Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and
his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great
authority.”

The beast will have an image built in its honor. The image is a replica of
the Papacy that is raised up in its honor by Protestant America
(Revelation 13:11-18)

 Revelation 13:14: “And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he
was granted to do in the sight of the beast, telling those who dwell on the earth to make
an image to the beast who was wounded by the sword and lived.”
 “In order for the United States to form an image of the beast, the religious power must so
control the civil government that the authority of the state will also be employed by the
church to accomplish her own ends.” The Great Controversy, p. 443
 But in the very act of enforcing a religious duty by secular power, the churches would
themselves form an image to the beast; hence the enforcement of Sunday keeping in the
United States would be an enforcement of the worship of the beast and his image.” The
Great Controversy, p. 448
 “The ‘image to the beast’ represents that form of apostate Protestantism which will be
developed when the Protestant churches shall seek the aid of the civil power for the
enforcement of their dogmas.” The Great Controversy, p. 445
 As the idea to build the image was not Nebuchadnezzar’s but rather that of the religious
leaders, so the idea of building an image of and to the beast will be the idea of the religious
leaders of the Protestant churches in the United States.

The Mark of the Beast will be Imposed by Force

Revelation 13:15: “He was granted power to give breath to the image of the beast, that the image
of the beast should both speak and cause as many as would not worship the image of the beast
to be killed.”

 The mark of the beast is the exact opposite of the seal of God. The seal of God is the
Sabbath so the mark of the beast must be a another day of worship that seeks to
counterfeit God’s genuine day.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 74 of 369

  The first angel’s message in Revelation 14:7 calls us to worship the creator in contrast to
worshipping the beast and his image in the third angel’s message (Revelation 14:9-11).

Ellen White remarks:

“An idol sabbath has been set up, as the golden image was set up in the plains of Dura.
And as Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, issued a decree that all who would not bow
down and worship this image should be killed, so a proclamation will be made that all who
will not reverence the Sunday institution will be punished with imprisonment and death.”
Manuscript Releases, Volume 14 p. 91

The number of the beast is 666:

 The beast has a blasphemous name (Revelation 13:1).

 What is blasphemy? Blasphemy is when a mere man claims to be God on earth and also
claims to have power to forgive sins (Mark 2:7; John 10:33).
 The blasphemous name has a number (Revelation 13:17).
 How do you get a number from a name?
 In ancient times numbers were written with letters.
 What language do we employ?
 It must be in Latin because this is a Roman power (Revelation 13:2).

The image and mark must have something to do with the sun

 Is it the same to worship the sun as it is to worship on Sunday? In principle it is the same
because an idol is created by men’s hands for worship while Sunday has been created by
man for worship. Anything that man creates for worship in place of what God has created
for worship is an idol.
 The pope has an official name whose number value is 666: Vicarius Filii Dei. Notably, the
word Antichrist means ‘one who occupies the place of Christ’.
 Ellen White draws the parallel:

“History will be repeated. False religion will be exalted. The first day of the week, a
common working day, possessing no sanctity whatever, will be set up as was the image
at Babylon. All nations and tongues and peoples will be commanded to worship this
spurious sabbath. This is Satan's plan to make of no account the day instituted by God,
and given to the world as a memorial of creation. Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Commentary, Volume 7 p. 976

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 75 of 369

  “We are to warn men and women against the worship of the beast and his image—against
the worship of the idol Sunday. But in doing this work, we need not begin a warfare against
unbelievers. We are simply to present the Word of the Lord, in its true dignity and purity,
before the minds of those who are ignorant or indifferent regarding its teachings. . . . We
need not tell them that they will go to hell unless they keep the Sabbath of the fourth
commandment. The truth itself, accompanied by the power of the Holy Spirit, will convict
and convert hearts.” Christ Triumphant, p. 178
 The Papacy boasts that it has changed the day of worship from Sabbath to Sunday by the
authority and as the representative of Jesus Christ. In this way the papacy claims to
exercise the power and prerogatives of God because it is Vicarius Filii Dei. Sunday has
been created as the idol sabbath made by man for worship.

Once again worship will be the central issue and it will be worldwide
(Revelation 13:3, 8, 16; 14:6; 16:13, 14; 17:15)

 Revelation 14:6: “Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the
everlasting gospel to preach to those who dwell on the earth — to every nation, tribe,
tongue, and people.”
 Revelation 13:3: “And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his
deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast.”
 Revelation 17:15: “Then he said to me: "The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits,
are peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues.”
 Revelation 13:8: “All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not
been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”
 Revelation 13:16: “He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to
receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads.”
 Revelation 16:13, 14: “And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs coming out of the mouth
of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
14 For they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the earth

and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.”
 “The decree enforcing the worship of this day is to go forth to all the world”. Seventh-
day Adventist Bible Commentary, Volume 7 p. 967

But the commandments will also be an issue, especially the first table
of the law (Revelation 12:17; 14:12)

Revelation 12:17: “And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with
the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus
Christ.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 76 of 369

Revelation 14:12: “Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the
commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.”

There will be a union of church and state (Revelation 17:1, 2; 18:3)

 “The dignitaries of church and state will unite to bribe, persuade, or compel all classes to honor
the Sunday.” The Great Controversy, p. 592
 Revelation 17:1, 2: “Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked
with me, saying to me, "Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on
many waters 2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants
of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication."
 Revelation 18:3: “For all the nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication,
the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth
have become rich through the abundance of her luxury."
 “When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are
held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain
their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman
hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result.” The Great
Controversy, p. 445

A death decree will be proclaimed against God’s faithful remnant

(Revelation 13:15)

 “This argument [the one based on John 11:51] will appear conclusive; and a decree will
finally be issued against those who hallow the Sabbath of the fourth commandment,
denouncing them as deserving of the severest punishment and giving the people liberty,
after a certain time, to put them to death. Romanism in the Old World and apostate
Protestantism in the New will pursue a similar course toward those who honor all the
divine precepts.” The Great Controversy, p. 615
 “Fearful is the issue to which the world is to be brought. The powers of earth, uniting to
war against the commandments of God, will decree that "all, both small and great, rich
and poor, free and bond" (Revelation 13:16), shall conform to the customs of the church
by the observance of the false sabbath. All who refuse compliance will be visited with civil
penalties, and it will finally be declared that they are deserving of death.” The Great
Controversy, p. 604

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 77 of 369

The death decree will be universal (Revelation 13:15, 16)

 “As the Sabbath has become the special point of controversy throughout Christendom,
and religious and secular authorities have combined to enforce the observance of the
Sunday, the persistent refusal of a small minority to yield to the popular demand will make
them objects of universal execration.” The Great Controversy, p. 615

As in all apostasies of history, music and external display will play a

significant role in the end time (Revelation 18:22)

 Satan knows what type of music to use to dull our spiritual senses and make us more
susceptible to his temptations.

 “Many Protestants suppose that the Catholic religion is unattractive and that its worship is a
dull, meaningless round of ceremony. Here they mistake. While Romanism is based upon
deception, it is not a coarse and clumsy imposture. The religious service of the Roman Church
is a most impressive ceremonial. Its gorgeous display and solemn rites fascinate the senses of
the people and silence the voice of reason and of conscience. The eye is charmed. Magnificent
churches, imposing processions, golden altars, jeweled shrines, choice paintings, and exquisite
sculpture appeal to the love of beauty. The ear also is captivated. The music is unsurpassed.
The rich notes of the deep-toned organ, blending with the melody of many voices as it swells
through the lofty domes and pillared aisles of her grand cathedrals, cannot fail to impress the
mind with awe and reverence. This outward splendor, pomp, and ceremony, that only mocks
the longings of the sin-sick soul, is an evidence of inward corruption. The religion of Christ
needs not such attractions to recommend it. In the light shining from the cross, true
Christianity appears so pure and lovely that no external decorations can enhance its true
worth. It is the beauty of holiness, a meek and quiet spirit, which is of value with God. The
Great Controversy, pp. 566, 567

God will have a faithful remnant which will refuse to worship the
image to the beast (Revelation 12:17; 14:12; 15:2-4)

There will be a shaking among God’s people (Matthew 24:10-12)

 “To stand in defense of truth and righteousness when the majority forsakes us, to fight
the battles of the Lord when champions are few--this will be our test. At this time we must
gather warmth from the coldness of others, courage from their cowardice, and loyalty
from their treason. The nation will be on the side of the great rebel leader.” Testimonies
for the Church, Volume 5 p. 136
 “As the storm approaches, a large class who has professed faith in the third angel's
message, but has not been sanctified through obedience to the truth, abandon their
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 78 of 369
 position and join the ranks of the opposition. By uniting with the world and partaking of
its spirit, they have come to view matters in nearly the same light; and when the test is
brought, they are prepared to choose the easy, popular side. Men of talent and pleasing
address, who once rejoiced in the truth, employ their powers to deceive and mislead souls.
They become the most bitter enemies of their former brethren. When Sabbath keepers are
brought before the courts to answer for their faith, these apostates are the most efficient
agents of Satan to misrepresent and accuse them and by false reports and insinuations to
stir up the rulers against them.” The Great Controversy, p. 608
 ‘The time is not far distant when the test will come to every soul. The mark of the beast
will be urged upon us. Those who have step by step yielded to worldly demands and
conformed to worldly customs will not find it a hard matter to yield to the powers that be,
rather than subject themselves to derision, insult, threatened imprisonment, and death.
The contest is between the commandments of God and the commandments of men. In
this time the gold will be separated from the dross in the church. True godliness will be
clearly distinguished from the appearance and tinsel of it. Many a star that we have
admired for its brilliancy will then go out in darkness. Chaff like a cloud will be borne away
on the wind, even from places where we see only floors of rich wheat. All who assume the
ornaments of the sanctuary, but are not clothed with Christ's righteousness, will appear
in the shame of their own nakedness. Testimonies for the Church, Volume 5 p. 81

Protestant religious leaders will be the foremost to accuse the remnant

of God

Just like in the days of Elijah, John the Baptist, Jesus and the middle ages:

 “Those who honor the Bible Sabbath will be denounced as enemies of law and order, as
breaking down the moral restraints of society, causing anarchy and corruption, and calling
down the judgments of God upon the earth. Their conscientious scruples will be
pronounced obstinacy, stubbornness, and contempt of authority. They will be accused of
disaffection toward the government. Ministers who deny the obligation of the divine law
will present from the pulpit the duty of yielding obedience to the civil authorities as
ordained of God. In legislative halls and courts of justice, commandment keepers will be
misrepresented and condemned. A false coloring will be given to their words; the worst
construction will be put upon their motives.” The Great Controversy, p. 592
 “As the controversy extends into new fields and the minds of the people are called to God's
downtrodden law, Satan is astir. The power attending the message will only madden those
who oppose it. The clergy will put forth almost superhuman efforts to shut away the light
lest it should shine upon their flocks. By every means at their command they will endeavor
to suppress the discussion of these vital questions.” The Great Controversy, p. 607

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 79 of 369

Satan will manifest his wrath (Revelation 12:17)

There will be a similar question as was asked by Nebuchadnezzar

(Revelation 13:3, 4)

 “I saw one of its heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and its deadly wound was
healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. 4 So they worshiped the
dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying: "Who is
like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?"

There will be a severe time of trouble and God’s people will appear
doomed

Daniel 11 has the sequence: King of the north goes out to annihilate many then Michael stands
up to defend his people, then they are delivered.

 “He numbers the world as his subjects; but the little company who keep the
commandments of God are resisting his supremacy. If he could blot them from the earth,
his triumph would be complete.” The Great Controversy, p. 618
 “When the protection of human laws shall be withdrawn from those who honor the law
of God, there will be, in different lands, a simultaneous movement for their destruction.
As the time appointed in the decree draws near, the people will conspire to root out the
hated sect. It will be determined to strike in one night a decisive blow, which shall utterly
silence the voice of dissent and reproof.” The Great Controversy, p. 635

The fiery furnace is the seven last plagues where the totality of God’s
wrath is to be poured out. The wicked will be destroyed but not the
righteous

 “Their affliction is great, the flames of the furnace seem about to consume them; but the
Refiner will bring them forth as gold tried in the fire. God's love for His children during the
period of their severest trial is as strong and tender as in the days of their sunniest
prosperity; but it is needful for them to be placed in the furnace of fire; their earthliness
must be consumed, that the image of Christ may be perfectly reflected.” The Great
Controversy, p. 621

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 80 of 369

The wicked oppressors of God’s people will perish with their own
weapons

 “The very ones that once admired them most will pronounce the most dreadful curses
upon them. The very hands that once crowned them with laurels will be raised for their
destruction. The swords which were to slay God's people are now employed to destroy
their enemies. Everywhere there is strife and bloodshed.” The Great Controversy, p. 655

Jesus will personally intervene to deliver His people

 Daniel 12:1: "At that time Michael shall stand up, the great prince who stands watch over
the sons of your people; and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there
was a nation, even to that time. And at that time your people shall be delivered, every one
who is found written in the book.”

This quotation is found in the chapter titled: ‘God’s People Delivered’:

 “When the protection of human laws shall be withdrawn from those who honor the law
of God, there will be, in different lands, a simultaneous movement for their destruction.
As the time appointed in the decree draws near, the people will conspire to root out the
hated sect. It will be determined to strike in one night a decisive blow, which shall utterly
silence the voice of dissent and reproof. The people of God--some in prison cells, some
hidden in solitary retreats in the forests and the mountains--still plead for divine
protection, while in every quarter companies of armed men, urged on by hosts of evil
angels, are preparing for the work of death. It is now, in the hour of utmost extremity that
the God of Israel will interpose for the deliverance of His chosen.” The Great Controversy,
p. 635

God will demand unswerving loyalty:

 “The season of distress before God's people will call for a faith that will not falter. His
children must make it manifest that He is the only object of their worship, and that no
consideration, not even that of life itself, can induce them to make the least concession to
false worship. To the loyal heart the commands of sinful, finite men will sink into
insignificance beside the word of the eternal God. Truth will be obeyed though the result
be imprisonment or exile or death. Prophets and Kings, pp. 512, 513

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 81 of 369

A Fireproof Character

 Isaiah 33:14-16. We must have a sterling character. Be faithful in the small things (Luke
16:10; Jeremiah 12:5)

Final Comforting Promise

Important are the lessons to be learned from the experience of the Hebrew youth on the plain of
Dura. In this our day, many of God's servants, though innocent of wrongdoing, will be given over
to suffer humiliation and abuse at the hands of those who, inspired by Satan, are filled with envy
and religious bigotry. Especially will the wrath of man be aroused against those who hallow the
Sabbath of the fourth commandment; and at last a universal decree will denounce these as
deserving of death.

The season of distress before God's people will call for a faith that will not falter. His children must
make it manifest that He is the only object of their worship, and that no consideration, not even
that of life itself, can induce them to make the least concession to false worship. To the loyal heart
the commands of sinful, finite men will sink into insignificance beside the word of the eternal God.
Truth will be obeyed though the result be imprisonment or exile or death.

As in the days of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, so in the closing period of earth's history the
Lord will work mightily in behalf of those who stand steadfastly for the right. He who walked with
the Hebrew worthies in the fiery furnace will be with His followers wherever they are. His abiding
presence will comfort and sustain. In the midst of the time of trouble--trouble such as has not
been since there was a nation--His chosen ones will stand unmoved. Satan with all the
hosts of evil cannot destroy the weakest of God's saints. Angels that excel in strength will protect
them, and in their behalf Jehovah will reveal Himself as a "God of gods," able to save to the
uttermost those who have put their trust in Him. Prophets and Kings, pp. 512, 513

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 82 of 369

 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #9 – NOTES ON DANIEL 4

Daniel 4 and 5: Comparison and Contrast

The chiastic structure of Daniel 1-7 (Daniel 2 & 7, 3 & 6 and 4 & 5) indicates that Daniel 4 and 5
are closely related:

 Both chapters describe arrogant, self-centered Babylonian kings.

 In Daniel 5:18-22 the prophet tells Belshazzar the story of Nebuchadnezzar’s madness.
This links the two chapters together.
 Both chapters describe the fall of Babylonian kings. But while the fall of Nebuchadnezzar
in Daniel 4 was temporary and remedial, the fall of Belshazzar was final and retributive.
 Why was Nebuchadnezzar’s judgment temporary and remedial? Why was there room for
repentance for Nebuchadnezzar and not for Belshazzar? The reason is provided in Daniel
5:18-22. Belshazzar sinned with a ‘high hand’. He had the entire history of his
grandfather before him and yet decided to purposely spite it. He did not repent and
humble his heart and therefore God closed the door of probation for Babylon and for
him. It did not have to be this way. Jeremiah 51:9 states:

“We would have healed Babylon, but she is not healed. Forsake her, and let us go
everyone to his own country; for her judgment reaches to heaven and is lifted up to
the skies.”
 At the end of human history, it will be shown that Babylon could have repented but she refused
to even in the face of great light (Revelation 16). The experiences of Nebuchadnezzar and his
grandson have a message for the kings and kingdoms of the earth at the end of time. While the
story of Nebuchadnezzar reveals what could have been, the story of Belshazzar reveals, tragically,
what will be.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 83 of 369

General Structure of Daniel 4

The king’s poetic anthem of praise in Daniel 4:1-3 should probably be included as the conclusion
of chapter 3. The LXX presents it this way. When Daniel’s three friends were delivered from the
furnace, the king was impressed with God’s signs and wonders. But at the end of chapter 4 we
will find that he was deeply impressed with God’s character as a person. His concept of God had
changed from One who performs signs and wonders to a God who can humble the proud and
perform the greatest miracle of all, transform the stony heart of a haughty despot to that of a
humble child.

First and Third Person

Verses 2-27 are the first person because the king is describing his own experience.
Verses 28-33 (while Nebuchadnezzar is beside himself) are in the third person because someone
else is telling the story.
Verses 34-37 return to the first person because the king is ‘all there’ once more.

Flow of the Chapter

 Nebuchadnezzar receives the dream (Daniel 4:4, 5).

 The king calls the wise men (Daniel 4:6, 7). These verses clearly reveal that the king
himself knew that the religion of Babylon was bankrupt so at last he has to call Daniel
(Daniel 4:18).
 Daniel comes to the rescue (Daniel 4:8, 9).
 The king tells Daniel the dream (Daniel 4:10-17).
 The king affirms his trust that Daniel will be able to interpret the dream (Daniel 4:18).
 Daniel is troubled about the meaning of the dream and yet chooses to tell the king the
truth (Daniel 4:19).
 Daniel repeats the dream to Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 4:20-26).
 Daniel counsels the king to ‘shape up’ to prevent God’s judgment (Daniel 4:27).
 The king manifests his arrogant pride one year later (Daniel 4:28-32).
 God’s voice pronounces the sentence upon the king (Daniel 4:31, 32).
 The sentence is executed and the king ‘loses it’ for seven years (Daniel 4:33)
 A sane Nebuchadnezzar praises God for humbling him (Daniel 4:34-37).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 84 of 369

Practical Lessons from Daniel 4

The Relentless God

We can learn valuable lessons about the process of the king’s conversion the first of which is
how God patiently works to transform human hearts into His image. God is relentless in seeking
our salvation:

God’s Persistence

Daniel 1, Daniel and his three friends were first introduced to Nebuchadnezzar. There is no doubt
that the king was impressed with their wisdom because he could see that they were ten times
better than all the magicians and astrologers (see Daniel 1:20). The king must have wondered
about the secret of their success. God was setting the stage for future developments. Yet the
king at that time was quite sure that he was in control so he enrolled the young men in the
Babylonian educational system, appointed their diet, changed their names and constantly
emphasized that his god was greater than their God.

Daniel 2:47: After Daniel told the king his dream and its meaning (in Daniel 2), the king seemed
to recognize that the Hebrew God was the God of gods. At this point, however, the Hebrew God
is not the ONLY God but the greatest of all the gods.

Chapter 3: Clearly indicates that even after the events of Daniel 2 the king was still an idolater
at heart as well as boastful, arrogant and cruel. He was not truly converted. Yet God still bore
with him.

The spectacular events of chapter 3 did nothing to convert the heart of the proud king. Notice
four things about the king’s decree in Daniel 3:29:

 First, Jehovah is not his God but rather the God of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego.
 Second, the king’s decree does not forbid the worship of other gods but simply forbids
‘speaking against the God of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego.’
 Third, the king’s cruelty is still manifested when he threatens to cut in pieces anyone who
speaks negatively about the God of the three Hebrew worthies. His cruelty reminds us of
Saddam Hussein.
 Finally, according to Daniel 4:1-3 Nebuchadnezzar conceived of the Hebrew God as a
great worker of signs and wonders but he does not at this point know God as his personal
friend.
 We see that God is a patient God. God does not give up on the king. He has a passion for
the salvation of the king. God was constantly on the king’s track—He wanted him as his
loving child.

At the beginning of Daniel 4 the king was still a servant of ‘his god’ (verse 8) and this in spite of
all that had occurred in Daniel 1-3. The king had repeatedly seen the bankruptcy of the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 85 of 369

Babylonian religion. In each of the first four chapters the Hebrew religion was clearly proved to
be superior.

 In Daniel 1 the Hebrew young men were proved ten times superior to the Babylonian
priests.
 In Daniel 2 the Chaldeans could not tell or interpret the dream.
 In Daniel 3 the Chaldeans accused the three young men and God delivered them from
the evil plot.
In spite of all of this, the king called these charlatans again in Daniel 4:7 (on the bankruptcy of
the Babylonian methods of divination see Isaiah 47:12, 13).

Nebuchadnezzar’s concept of the God’s was that of the Chaldeans in Daniel 2:11—a totally
transcendent god who is uninterested in human affairs. Ancient gods were conceived of as self-
serving despots and tyrants who did not care about human beings except to have them cater to
their every whim and fancy.

But slowly, and surely, the Hebrew God changed the king’s concept of God. He came to see that
God wanted to communicate His will to human beings. He came to see him as a God who is
interested in human affairs generally and in specific persons in particular. In fact, he came to
realize that the Hebrew God was interested in saving him!! He slowly came to realize that God
is not only the high and lofty one but is also with those of humble and contrite heart. That is,
God is concerned about His earthly children. He saw this clearly when Jesus Himself came into
the furnace to deliver His servants from certain death.

In Daniel 1-4 we see the Hebrew God as the patient and long-suffering God who does all in His
power to save. God even gave the king twelve months after the dream to repent in order to avert
punishment (Daniel 4:29). After all, the prophecy was conditional (Daniel 4:27) and the
judgment could be averted if the king repented and changed his ways.

But as the memory of his dream faded from his mind, ‘he lost confidence in the interpretation of
the dream, and jested at his former fears’ (Ellen G. White, Prophets and Kings, p. 519)

The king’s confession at the end of chapter 4 reveals that he was finally truly converted to God.

The Question of When

At what point in the life of the king did the events of chapter 4 take place? We know that
Nebuchadnezzar ruled for 43 years (605-562 BC). Was he converted toward the beginning, at the
middle or toward the end of his reign? There can be little doubt that the events of Daniel 4 took
place toward the end of the king’s life.

First, Daniel 4:4 explains that the king was at peace in his house and flourishing in the palace.
This is a common expression which means that he was enjoying the fruits of his conquests. In
other words, the wars of conquest were over. It is at the time when things go best that we forget
God the most.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 86 of 369

We know that the last military campaign that the king undertook was in his 37th regnal year (568
BC) when he conquered Egypt. Ellen White explained that Egypt was given by God into the king’s
hand as a reward for his long and somewhat fruitless siege of Tyre which lasted some 13 years
(The Youth’s Instructor, October 11, 1904). We have quite a bit of information about
Nebuchadnezzar throughout most of his life except for the last seven years (568-562 BC,
inclusive reckoning).

Why is there this period of historical silence in Nebuchadnezzar’s record? Undoubtedly the king
was enjoying his good ‘vegetarian cuisine’ along with the beasts of the field. This means that the
king was most likely converted in the 37th year of his reign. It surely did take God a long time to
prevail over the proud ruler!

Ellen White confirms that his insanity came late in his life:

“In the early part of his acquaintance with Daniel, the king had found that he was the only one
who could give him relief in his perplexity, and now at a later period, when another perplexing
vision is given him, he remembers Daniel.” Manuscript Releases, volume 13, p. 63

We know that the king was sane when he conquered Jerusalem in 605 BC. We know that he was
sane when Jerusalem fell for a second time in 597 BC. He was still sane when he destroyed
Jerusalem in 586 BC. We know that he was sane when he fought against Tyre for a period of 13
years from 582-569 BC. We know that he conquered Egypt in the year 568 BC. Nebuchadnezzar’s
madness is to be placed during the last seven years of his life.

God worked with the king for a long 37 years and finally conquered his heart! God wanted
Nebuchadnezzar to be his.

Regarding the king’s final and true conversion, Ellen White writes:

“The once proud monarch had become a humble child of God; the tyrannical, overbearing ruler,
a wise and compassionate king. He who had defied and blasphemed the God of heaven, now
acknowledged the power of the Most High and earnestly sought to promote the fear of Jehovah
and the happiness of his subjects. Under the rebuke of Him who is King of kings and Lord of lords,
Nebuchadnezzar had learned at last the lesson which all rulers need to learn--that true greatness
consists in true goodness.” Prophets and Kings, p. 521

“King Nebuchadnezzar, before whom Daniel so often honored the name of God, was finally
thoroughly converted and learned to "praise and extol and honor the King of heaven." Review
and Herald, January 11, 1906

We are even told that after his conversion, the king became a witness for God by presenting his
testimony to others:

“The king upon the Babylonian throne became a witness for God, giving his testimony, warm and
eloquent, from a grateful heart that was partaking of the mercy and grace, the righteousness and
peace, of the divine nature” The Youth’s Instructor, December 13, 1904

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 87 of 369

Greater than any sign of wonder (such as revealing dreams, delivering people from a furnace,
healing people, speaking in tongues) is the change of a person from having a self-centered heart
to one who makes God and fellow human beings first. The greatest miracle of all is the change
of a sinner into a saint. It will be truly exciting to meet the Nebuchadnezzar in the kingdom.

Message to World’s Political Leaders

Another lesson we can learn from the experience of the king is that even though God gives
dominion to human rulers, He is still the absolute arbiter and guide of human history.

The dream of the tree reminds us of the dominion which was originally given to man at creation
over the birds of the air, the beasts of the field and all the earth (see Genesis 1:26, 28). The
original dominion was to be loving, kind, just and merciful. It was to bring life and peace to all
the inhabitants of the earth.

But when Adam sinned human rulers became despotic and tyrannical and abused their
dominion. Rulers were always to remember that they were vice-regents of God to bless their
subjects but soon they forgot this and they exploited those whom they were supposed to protect
and benefit.

Nebuchadnezzar thought he was king because of his superior wisdom and ability. In his own
words:

"Is not this great Babylon that I have built for a royal dwelling by my mighty power and for the
honor of my majesty?" (Daniel 4:30)

But, really, why was Nebuchadnezzar really the king?

The central theme of the book of Daniel is found in chapter 2 and verse 21. Three ideas come to
view in this verse: 1) God is in control of the times, 2) God sets up kings and removes kings and
3) God gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those that know understanding. These three
ideas can clearly be discerned in Daniel 4.

First of all, God changed Nebuchadnezzar’s times by making seven times pass over him. While
he was planning for a brilliant future God changed his itinerary. Secondly, God placed him on the
throne, removed him from the throne and then restored him to it. Third, God also took away his
wisdom and understanding in the wink of an eye. This shows that God is in control of historical
events, even when human beings refuse to cooperate. Regarding Nebuchadnezzar’s illness, Ellen
White remarks:

“As the beasts have no knowledge of God, and therefore do not acknowledge his sovereignty, so
Nebuchadnezzar had been unmindful of God and his mercies. Prosperity and popularity had led
him to feel independent of God, and to use for his own glory the talent of reason that God had
entrusted to him. Messages of warning were sent to him, but he heeded them not. The heavenly
Watcher took cognizance of the king's spirit and actions, and in a moment stripped the proud
boaster of all that his Creator had given him.” Youth’s Instructor, March 28, 1905

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 88 of 369

“In a moment the reason that God had given him was taken away; the judgment that the king
thought perfect, the wisdom on which he prided himself, was removed, and the once mighty ruler
was a maniac. His hand could no longer sway the scepter. The messages of warning had been
unheeded; now, stripped of the power his Creator had given him, and driven from men,
Nebuchadnezzar "did eat grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his
hairs were grown like eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' claws." Prophets and Kings, p. 520

“The instant that the words were uttered, the sentence of judgment was pronounced. The king's
reason was taken away. The judgment that he had thought so perfect, the wisdom that he had
prided himself on possessing, were removed. The jewel of the mind, that which elevates man
above the beasts, he no longer retained.” Testimonies for the Church, Volume 8 p. 126

Message of Daniel Chapters 1-4

Daniel Chapters 1 – 4: reveal a God who is in absolute control of history:

Chapter 1:

The Hebrews were taken captive to Babylon because ‘God gave them’ into the king’s hand
(Daniel 1:1, 2). God also gave them wisdom and understanding.

Chapter 2:

Nebuchadnezzar was king of Babylon because God placed him there (Daniel 2:37, 38). It is God
who determines how history will flow and it is He who will establish a kingdom which shall never
be destroyed. Only a God who is able to reveal the future history of the world can mold events
so that they reach the climax which He has established (see Isaiah 46:9, 10).

Chapter 3:

When the king flexed his muscles and attempted to change God’s perspective of history (God’s
times) and kill everyone who did not agree, God showed him that his power is limited—there
were three young men who would not bow to the king’s authority. When the king threw them
into the furnace God overturned their death sentence by personally delivering them from the
fire.

Chapter 4:

This chapter reveals, in multiple ways, that God is in control of history (Daniel 17, 24-26, 32, 34,
35 and 37). God took away the king’s throne, preserved it while he was insane and then restored
it to him at the end of the seven times. Notice carefully some of the expressions used in this
chapter: “they shall” (verses 25 and 32), “was driven” (verse 33) “was established”, “was added”
(verse 36). These passive verbs indicate that someone besides the king is doing these things. And
who is doing it? The answer is in verse 17: the Watchers from heaven.

Why do nations rise and fall? Daniel’s counsel to Nebuchadnezzar gives the answer to this
question (see Daniel 4:27). Notice also the following verses on why nations fall (Proverbs 14:34;
16:12; 20:28; Psalm 33:12).
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 89 of 369
The Greatest Lesson of All

The greatest lesson from Daniel 4 was expressed by Jesus over six hundred years later:

“He who exalts himself will be humbled and he who humbles himself will be exalted.” (Matthew
23:12).
Notice in this verse that the proud person exalts himself and therefore someone else humbles
him. On the other hand, the lowly person humbles himself and someone else exalts him. That is,
if we don’t take care of the humbling, God will!!

The mystery of iniquity is characterized by a desire to ascend:

 At the very beginning of human history Eve desired to exalt herself to the level of God
but she and her husband ended up in the dust (see Genesis 3:1-6, 19). In this context it is
interesting that the word ‘humility’ comes from humus which means ‘dust’ or ‘dirt’.
When we realize that we are but dust, then God can do something great for us and
through us.
 Ezekiel 28 explains that Lucifer manifested what I call the four sins of pride: 1) He became
proud of his wisdom and corrupted it (Ezekiel 28:12), 2) he was filled with pride because
of his beauty (Ezekiel 28:12, 17), 3) he exalted himself because of his riches (Ezekiel 28:4,
5), 4) he aspired to a position of power (Ezekiel 28:2, 3, 6: Isaiah 14:12-14). Because he
exalted himself, he will be cast down to the pit (Ezekiel 28:8, 17, 18). It is worth
remembering that without the jewel of reason that God gives us we would have none of
these four qualities. In order to be wise you must have a brain and the brain must be able
to reason!
 Isaiah 14 depicts Lucifer’s desire to ascend to the very heights of God’s throne and for
this reason he was cast down and shall be cast down (Ezekiel 14:12, 14 and 15).
 Absalom aspired to take David’s throne and ended up buried in the pit (2 Samuel 18:17,
18).
 The man of lawlessness wants to make himself God but will end up thrown into the fiery
abyss (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4).

The Mystery of Godliness, on the other hand, is characterized by a desire to descend:

 1 Timothy 3:16 begins with God coming down and taking human flesh and it ends up with
him going up and being received in glory.
 Psalm 22:1-21 describes the suffering and humiliation of Jesus even to the point of being
placed in the dust. But Psalm 22-30 describe the glorious exaltation of Jesus in the
heavenly courts.
 Philippians 2:6-11 tells us that because Jesus humbled Himself, he was highly exalted and
given a name that is above every name.
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 90 of 369
  The declaration of Jesus, “He who humbles himself will be exalted and he who exalts
himself will be humbled” is used in three different contexts in the gospels. 1) Matthew
23:12 where Jesus spoke about the pride of the Pharisees, 2) Luke 14:11 where Jesus
spoke about those who always wish to occupy the first seats, 3) Luke 18:14 where Jesus
contrasts the Pharisee and the Publican. Jesus also expressed the same concept when He
stated that the first shall be last and the last shall be first (see Matthew 20:16; Mark
9:35; 10:31). Jesus also illustrated the principle in action when he instituted the ordinance
of humility (see John 13).
 See also James 4:6, 10; I Peter 5:5, 6.
 The law of life is the law of service. The law of death is the law of self-service. The secret
of life is to give of yourself to others. The Sea of Galilee receives to give and it is full of
life. The Dead Sea receives and does not give and it has no life.
 When Nebuchadnezzar looked up to God, he came to his senses again (Daniel 4:34).

Conclusion

Jesus has eternally subordinated Himself to the Father. Even before sin came into this world the
Son executed the Father’s plans and was subject to His authority. And yet the Father and the Son
are equals but they have different functions. Voluntary subordination according to God’s plan
does not mean inferiority. While Jesus was on earth He was also subordinate to His Father even
to the point of saying: “the Father is greater than I.” Now, the Father is still the head of Christ (I
Corinthians 11:3). Finally, when sin is eradicated from the universe, Jesus will subject Himself
eternally to His Father (I Corinthians 15:24-28). Does this have anything to say about the present
push for women’s ordination? Is the demand for a higher position divine or demonic?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 91 of 369

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 92 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #10 – NOTES ON DANIEL 5

According to the Bible, Babylon will never be rebuilt (Jeremiah 50:38-40; Isaiah 13:19-22). Yet in
Revelation Babylon plays a very important role in end time events. Is there not a contradiction
between the prophecies that say that Babylon would never be rebuilt and the book of Revelation
where Babylon plays a very important role in the consummation of human history? There is really
no contradiction. The Babylon of the book of Revelation is actually the spiritual fulfillment of
what the literal city represented. Notice how the principle is clearly enunciated by Louis F. Were:

“In the Old Testament times the Lord had the Jewish nation as His chosen race, with its capital in
Jerusalem. Satan then also had a kingdom, with its capital in Babylon. After the rejection of the
Jewish people as His chosen nation, the Lord chose members of all nations to make up His kingdom
on earth. Satan also changed his kingdom into a church—that is, anciently a nation opposed a
nation, but in the New Testament it is a false church that opposes the true church.” Louis F. Were,
The Fall of Babylon in Type and Antitype, p. 8

Ellen White supports this point of view. In referring to the Loud Cry message of Revelation 18:1-
4 she describes the spiritual nature of end time Babylon:

“The sins of Babylon will be laid open. The fearful results of enforcing the observances of the
church by civil authority, the inroads of spiritualism, the stealthy but rapid progress of the papal
power--all will be unmasked. By these solemn warnings the people will be stirred. Thousands upon
thousands will listen who have never heard words like these. In amazement they hear the
testimony that Babylon is the church, fallen because of her errors and sins, because of her
rejection of the truth sent to her from heaven.” The Great Controversy, pp. 606, 607

This principle means that the literal things connected with Old Testament Babylon (such as wine,
cup, idols, harlot, Euphrates, etc.) must be interpreted in a symbolic manner in the book of
Revelation.

Daniel was about 84 years old and Belshazzar was about 36 when the events of Daniel 5 took
place.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 93 of 369

Sources for the Study of Daniel 5

The Biblical sources:

 Daniel 5: an eyewitness account

 Isaiah 13-14
 Jeremiah 25
 Jeremiah 50, 51
 Isaiah 47

The secular sources:

 The Cyrus Cylinder (in the British Museum in London).

 The Nabonidus Chronicle (in the British Museum in London).
 Greek historian Herodotus (Histories I. 191) stated that the city fell while the king’s court
was drinking wine and Xenophon (Cyropaedia VII.5.30) wrote that Cyrus killed the king of
Babylon upon his entrance into the city.
 For many years historical critical scholars affirmed that the account in Daniel 5 was
historically inaccurate for three reasons:

1) There was no mention of King Belshazzar in secular history.

2) According to secular sources, the last king of Babylon was known to be Nabonidus,
not Belshazzar.
3) It makes no sense that Daniel would be offered the third place in the kingdom. Why
wouldn’t he be offered the second place?

The discovery of the Nabonidus Chronicle has resolved all three problems. In the Nabonidus
Chronicle Belshazzar is mentioned by name. He is spoken of as co-regent with his father,
Nabonidus, who had gone to the desert oasis of Teima in Arabia to recover from some
unexplained illness. In the words of the Verse Account of Nabonidus (British Museum Tablet
38,299):

“He [Nabonidus] entrusted the ‘camp’ to his oldest (son), the first-born, the troops everywhere in
the country he ordered under his (command). He let (everything) go, entrusted the kingship to
him and, himself, he started out for a long journey.” (Quoted in C. Mervyn Maxwell, God Cares,
volume 1, p. 91)

This clearly explains the reason why the book of Daniel refers to Daniel as the third in the
kingdom!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 94 of 369

Ellen White confirms what has been revealed by secular history:

“Admitted to a share in kingly authority at fifteen years of age, Belshazzar gloried in his power
and lifted up his heart against the God of heaven.” The Youth’s Instructor, May 19, 1898
Other Biblical details that are corroborated by secular history are:

 A banquet was in progress the very night that Babylon fell (Xenophon, Cyropaedia 7.5.15).
 The king of Babylon was killed the night that Babylon fell (Xenophon, Cyropaedia VII.V.24-
32).
 The Persians diverted the River Euphrates and then marched into the city in the dry
riverbed (Herodotus, The Histories, I: 189-192).

Babylon, the Greatest City of Antiquity

According to the discoveries of archeologists, Babylon had two sets of walls—the outer walls and
the inner walls. Both were actually double walls. The two inner walls were twelve and twenty-
two feet wide respectively. The two walls making up the outer defenses were twenty-four and
twenty-six feet wide. Thus, in order for enemies to get into the inner city where the palace and
the main temple were located, they would have had to go through or over close to eighty-five
feet of walls and each wall was well defended! We know that horses could actually gallop on top
of the outer walls.

The city had 53 major temples and 955 smaller sanctuaries or shrines. It had 384 altars
throughout the city streets. The greatest temple was the Great Ziggurat, which was built in honor
of the patron sun-god Marduk. This temple was 300 feet wide at its base and 300 feet high. Inside
the temple the predominant colors were purple and scarlet.

The city proper covered an area of 12 miles and thus was the second largest city in antiquity. The
entrances to the city were guarded by lion sphinxes.

Crucial to the protection of Babylon was the Euphrates River which ran through the center of the
city from north to south. Great brass gates protected the city where the river entered and exited
the city (see Isaiah 45:1-3). The Euphrates guaranteed a constant source of water and food for
the city. It is also noteworthy that when the city was taken in October by Darius and Cyrus, the
Euphrates River was at its lowest ebb.

Nebuchadnezzar had built an elaborate system of canals outside the city to divert the excess
water when the river was at flood stage. These channels took the water to a nearby lake.

According to the testimony of the prophet Isaiah, Babylon was a very rich city (Jeremiah 51:13).
It was truly the golden city. Babylon’s great banquet hall has also been excavated by
archeologists. It measured 56 X 171 feet.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 95 of 369

The Sins of Babylon

According to the Bible, the kingdom of Babylon was guilty of a catalogue of sins:

Sin #1:

Babylon attempted to force all nations to practice her idolatry and false worship (Daniel 3;
Daniel 5:1-4, 23, 24).

Babylon forced all nations to drink her wine. In fact, drinking wine at the banquet hall let
Belshazzar to blur the distinction between the holy and the common and then led him to worship
the works of his own hands (see Jeremiah 25:27-38; 51:7, 8; Daniel 5:1-4). In a similar story,
when Nadab and Abihu drank wine they were also unable to distinguish between the holy and
the common and this led to their death (Leviticus 10; see also Isaiah 5:20-24; Ezekiel 22:26).

Notice how Ellen White links the sin of Belshazzar with the sin that will be committed by the
Christian world at the end of time:

“The command for the observance of the holy Sabbath of the Lord is placed in the very bosom of
the Decalogue, and is so plain that none need err as to its import, and yet it is treated with as
great profanation as were the sacred vessels at the feast of Belshazzar. God sanctified and
blessed the seventh day, setting it apart to be observed as holy time. Yet the Sabbath of the Lord
has been used as a common working day, while a day which possesses no sanctity whatever has
been put in the place of God's sanctified day.” Signs of the Times, July 27, 1891

Let’s ask a series questions about true worship and its sign:

 What distinguishes the true God from all false gods? The fact that God created the
heavens and the earth (Psalm 96:5).
 Why do we worship God? Because He is the Creator (Psalm 95:1-6).
 Did God create, so to speak, ‘with His own hands’ a holy day that was to be used by man
to worship the true God? (Genesis 2:2, 3; Exodus 20:8-11; 31:12-18). Yes, God made the
Sabbath, so to speak, ‘with His own hands’. He created it as holy time to remind man that
He was the Creator.
 What stands at the heart of all worship? The Sabbath stands at the heart of all worship
(Revelation 14:7; Isaiah 66:22, 23).

Now let’s formulate another series of questions about false worship and its sign:

 Does the Sunday teach us to distinguish between the true Creator God and all false gods?
No.
 Did God make Sunday as a day of worship or was Sunday made for worship by the hands
of man?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 96 of 369

  When we worship on a day made for worship by the hands of man, what sins are we
committing? Idolatry and false worship, right? Idolatry and false worship are intimately
intertwined. An idol is anything that man makes for worship which God has not made for
worship. Thus we have the expression: ‘they worshiped the works of their own hands (see
Psalm 115:4; Isaiah 2:8; 31:7; Jeremiah 1:16; Acts 7:41).
 In actual fact, to worship on Sunday is the same in principle as worshipping the sun!

Now let’s ask two final series of questions:

 Who created the sun? God, right?

 Did God create the sun for worship? No
 What sin would I commit if I turn the sun into an object of worship? Idolatry!

 Who created the first day of the week? God, right?

 Did God create the first day of the week for worship? No, it is a common work day.
 What sin would I commit if my own hands turn the first day of the week into a day of
worship? Idolatry, right?

This is the reason why Ellen White has called Sunday the idol sabbath:
“The Sabbath question is one that will demand great care and wisdom in its presentation. Much
of the grace and power of God will be needed to cast down the idol that has been erected in the
shape of a false sabbath.” Testimonies for the Church, vol. 9, p. 211

Sin #2:

Babylon was involved deeply in occultic practices and each of these practices is based in some
way with the false doctrine of the immortality of the soul (see Daniel 5:7; Isaiah 47:9, 12, 13;
Revelation 18:23)

Sin #3:

One of the greatest sins of Babylon was its persecution of God’s people. Babylon is the enemy,
par excellence, of God’s people (Daniel 1:1-4). It is impossible to study about Babylon without
making reference to God’s people (Jeremiah 50:6, 7, 11, 23, 28, 33, 34; 51:5, 24, 34-37, 44, 49;
Isaiah 14:16, 17). It was Babylon which destroyed the city of Jerusalem, its temple and its wall.
God promised that He would punish Babylon as vengeance for ‘His temple’ (Jeremiah 51:11 and
Daniel 8:10-12). In this context God is spoken of as the Goel (redeemer) who will defend the
cause of His people (see Ruth 3:9; 2:20; Numbers 35:19; Isaiah 51:9). Like a shepherd cares for
his sheep, the head cares for the body, the husband cares for the wife and the sovereign cares
for his vassal, so God will care for His own people.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 97 of 369

Babylon Apparently Inviolable

When Belshazzar celebrated his banquet, the enemy already had the city surrounded. The
question is, why would the king have a banquet when the enemy was at the gates? The simple
answer is that Belshazzar considered the city to be invincible and impregnable.

Isaiah 47:7, 8, 10 describes the arrogant self-security of Babylon on its last night. She claimed to
be the “I am” and she boastfully denied that she would become a widow or lose her children. It
is significant that Babylon in Isaiah 47 is described as being composed of a three-fold union. The
first part of the union was Babylon, the harlot. The second part of Babylon was composed of
Babylon’s children. Finally, the last part of Babylon consisted of her lovers with whom she
committed fornication. The book of Revelation will pick up on this three-fold union (see Isaiah
47:9; Revelation 17:1-5)

Ellen White well describes the false security that Babylon felt on its last fateful night:

“It was not long before reverses came. He [Belshazzar] had been defeated in battle by Cyrus, and
for two years had been besieged in the city of Babylon. Within that seemingly impregnable
fortress, with its massive walls and its gates of brass, protected by the river Euphrates, and
supplied with provisions for a twenty years' siege, the voluptuous monarch felt secure, and
passed his time in mirth and revelry.” Review and Herald, February 8, 1881 (see also Prophets
and Kings, p. 523 where Ellen White remarks: “Babylon was besieged by Cyrus, nephew of Darius
the Mede, and commanding general of the combined armies of the Medes and Persians.”).

Babylon’s Close of Probation

Why did God spare Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom while He destroyed Belshazzar’s? The answer is
found in Daniel 5:18-22. Belshazzar had the benefit of Nebuchadnezzar’s experience and in spite
of this knowledge he chose to spite God. At the end of time the Christian world will also reject
the noon-day light with which God will fill the world (Revelation 18:1-5). This will be the
unpardonable sin. There will be no more that God can do for spiritual Babylon.

We know that Babylon fell on the 14th day of Tishri which is the seventh month of the Jewish
calendar. Four days before, the Day of Atonement had concluded (the tenth day of the seventh
month). Is it just possible that the judgment of Babylon took place four days before the Day of
Atonement? (see Daniel 7:8 where the little horn—a symbol of end time spiritual Babylon—is
judged on the Day of Atonement!

The ancients believed that the gods used balances to weigh the good and evil deeds of each
human being. If the bad outweighed the good deeds, then divine punishment would come. God
spoke to Belshazzar in a language that he could understand (on this concept of God weighing our
deeds see Ezekiel 5:1; I Samuel 2:3; Job 31:6; Proverbs 16:2).

Scholars have puzzled as to why Belshazzar’s wise men were not able to read the writing on the
wall. After all, the words were written in Chaldee which was their native tongue. It was not that

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 98 of 369

they could not read the words. They simply could not understand what the words meant. An
entire truth was expressed in each key word and therefore an interpretation was needed.

Ellen White makes the following striking comment about the handwriting on the wall:

“A light like the lightning followed the forming of every letter, and lingered there, making them
living characters of awful and terrible significance to all who looked upon them. "Mene, mene,
tekel, upharsin." Their very ignorance of those letters traced upon the wall, standing there
flashing with light, sent terror to their sinful hearts. Their aroused consciences interpreted these
letters to be a denunciation against them. Suspicion, fear, and alarm took hold upon king and
princes.” Testimonies to Ministers, p. 436

It will be noticed that in Daniel 5:23 the silver and the gold are inverted in the list of metals. Why
is this? Simply because Babylon at this point is history! God had judged her and found her
wanting. The next kingdom will be the silver kingdom—the Medes and Persians.

The inscription said:

 Mene: ‘numbered’
 Mene: ‘numbered’
 Tekel: ‘weighed’
 Upharsin: ‘divided’

Of these words only upharsin is plural to suggest the duality into which kingdom would be
divided—Medes and Persians. The ‘u’ in upharsin is translated ‘and’. In other words, the
inscription read: “numbered, numbered, weighed and divided.” Of course, this would not make
much sense to Belshazzar unless someone told him what had been numbered, what had been
weighed and what would be divided.

The Fall of Babylon

Cyrus came from the north and the rising sun and surrounded the city (Isaiah 41:2, 25; 46:11).
Cyrus did not come alone. We are told that other kings also accompanied him from the north
(Jeremiah 50:3, 9, 41; 51:11, 28).

Cyrus is a type of Christ. His name means ‘the sun’. He was called in righteousness (Isaiah 45:13;
42:6). He is called God’s ‘shepherd’ (Isaiah 44:24-28). He came from a ‘far country’ (Isaiah 46:11).
He is called God’s ‘anointed’ or ‘messiah’ (Isaiah 45:1). He delivered God’s captive people from
Babylon and prepared a way for them to return to their homeland to build the city, the temple
and the walls (Isaiah 45:13).

Cyrus diverted the water of the River Euphrates by creating a dam of logs where the river entered
the city. Thus, the waters filled the canals outside the city and the riverbed dried up in order to
allow the entrance of Cyrus’ armies into the city. Even though the entrances to the city were
protected by great brass gates, these gates had been left open on the fateful evening (see
Jeremiah 50:12, 23, 38; 51:12, 13, 36, 41-43, 54-56; Isaiah 44:27).
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 99 of 369
Ellen White agrees with the account of the Nabonidus Chronicle where we are told that the city
of Babylon was taken without a fight:

“Cyrus and his army marched up the bed of the river Euphrates; for trenches had been dug, and
the river turned from its course, so that there was no obstruction to their entering the city,
provided the gates were opened. The guardsmen were indulging in merriment and revelry, and
the city was left without defense. Before the officers were aware, the enemy had entered the city,
and escape was impossible. Those in one part of the city were slain or captured before those in
another part knew that the city was invaded. No alarm was sounded, no cry could be raised to
warn the people that the forces of Cyrus were upon them.” Signs of the Times, December 29,
1890

“In the unexpected entry of the army of the Persian conqueror into the heart of the Babylonian
capital by way of the channel of the river whose waters had been turned aside, and through the
inner gates that in careless security had been left open and unprotected, the Jews had abundant
evidence of the literal fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy concerning the sudden overthrow of their
oppressors.” Prophets and Kings, p. 552

“Babylon was besieged by Cyrus, nephew of Darius the Mede and commanding general of the
combined armies of the Medes and Persians. But within the seemingly impregnable fortress, with
its massive walls and its gates of brass, protected by the river Euphrates, and stocked with
provision in abundance, the voluptuous monarch felt safe and passed his time in mirth and
revelry.” Prophets and Kings, p. 523

Cyrus was acclaimed as a deliverer even by the populace of Babylon. Ellen White describes how
Daniel shared the prophecies of Isaiah with Cyrus which eventually led him to give a decree for
God’s people to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple:

“As the king saw the words foretelling, more than a hundred years before his birth, the manner
in which Babylon should be taken; as he read the message addressed to him by the Ruler of the
universe, [Isaiah 45:5, 6, 4, 13 quoted] his heart was profoundly moved, and he determined to
fulfill his divinely appointed mission.” Prophets and Kings, p. 557

The waters which dried up are then symbolically spoken of as drowning of Babylon (see Jeremiah
51:27, 42, 55, 63, 64). We can just imagine Jeremiah giving Seraiah the scroll of Jeremiah 50 and
51 and then telling him to travel to Babylon in the fourth year of king Zedekiah’s reign (594/93
BC). He was instructed that once there, he should go to the banks of the Euphrates, read the
scroll and then tie a stone to it and cast it into the depths of the River. When Seraiah did this
Babylon was at the height of its power and it appeared that what Jeremiah had prophesied was
impossible. The imagery here is that the Euphrates River would rise to annihilate the very power
which it had previously supported and protected. This theme will be picked up later in the book
of Revelation.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 100 of 369
At its fall Babylon would be left naked (Isaiah 47:3). She would lose her lovers and her children
and would no longer be the lady of kingdoms (Isaiah 47:5).

Babylon would have to sit in the dust (Isaiah 47:1). The kings that had fornicated with her would
eat her up (Jeremiah 25:14) and she would be burned with fire (Isaiah 47:14). All of these details
will be picked up in Revelation 17.

Babylon would be left alone. There would be no one to help her any longer (Jeremiah 50:32).
There would be no remnant left in Babylon (Jeremiah 50:26, 30; 51:3). She would be totally
destroyed (Jeremiah 51:58). Plagues would fall upon her (Jeremiah 50:13).

The fall of Babylon would be sudden and unexpected (Isaiah 47:5). Notice how the apostle Paul
picks up on this and applies it eschatologically in I Thessalonians 5:1-4; see also Jeremiah 51:8).

At her fall all the merchants of the nations would wail (Jeremiah 51:8, 54; Isaiah 13:6; Isaiah
47:15). She would be totally demolished (Jeremiah 50:13; 51:26). All of Babylon’s great leaders
were to fall by the sword (Jeremiah 50:35-37; 25:30-38).

There was to be a mighty earthquake connected with the fall of Babylon (Jeremiah 50:46). She
would drink the wine of God’s wrath (Jeremiah 51:57).

Conclusions and Lessons

God’s people were to heed God’s call and flee from Babylon to Jerusalem before Babylon was
destroyed (Jeremiah 51:6, 17-20, 45; 50:4, 5, 8, 19, 20 and 28). God’s people would the return
to Jerusalem singing the song of the redeemed (Jeremiah 51:48). Babylon received as she gave
(Jeremiah 50:29).

“Perilous is the condition of those who, growing weary of their watch, turn to the attractions of
the world. While the man of business is absorbed in the pursuit of gain, while the pleasure lover
is seeking indulgence, while the daughter of fashion is arranging her adornments--it may be in
that hour the Judge of all the earth will pronounce the sentence: "Thou art weighed in the
balances, and art found wanting." Daniel 5:27.” The Great Controversy, p. 491

“Babylon is a symbol of the world at large. When its doom was made certain, its kings and officers
seemed to be as men insane, and their own course hastened its destiny. When the doom of a
nation is fixed, it seems that all the energy, wisdom, and discretion of its former time of prosperity,
deserts its men of position, and they hasten the evil they would avert. Outside enemies are not
the greatest peril to an individual or a nation. The overthrow of a nation results, under the
providence of God, from some unwise or evil course of its own.” Signs of the Times, December
29, 1890

“The condemnation that will fall upon the nations of the earth in this day will be because of their
rejection of light, and will be similar to that which fell upon the kings of Babylon; it will be because
they have failed to make the most of present light, present opportunities for knowing what is
truth and righteousness. Our condemnation in the judgment will not result from the fact that we

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 101 of 369
have lived in error, but from the fact that we have neglected heaven-sent opportunities for
discovering truth. The means of becoming conversant with the truth are within the reach of all;
but, like the indulgent, selfish king, we give more attention to the things that charm the ear,
and please the eye, and gratify the palate, than to the things that enrich the mind, the divine
treasures of truth. It is through the truth that we may answer the great question, "What must I
do to be saved?" Signs of the Times, July 27, 1891

“In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be
judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not
correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings
conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the
sentence: "Found wanting." By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged.”
Testimonies for the Church, vol. 8 p. 247

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 102 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #11 – DANIEL 5 AS THE BACKGROUND TO

REVELATION 16 AND 17

Tips for the Study of Armageddon

 Look for the pattern or the broader picture and how the pieces fit together. Don’t merely
look for events but rather for the sequence or order of events. For example, the Elijah
passages of the Bible.
 Learn the Old Testament story well because it is the foundation for the typological
application.
 Don’t assume that Ellen White will quote the verses or even necessarily use their
language.
 Learn to ask questions about the passage. For example, I asked the question: Why does
Revelation 15 say that the 144,000 will sing the Song of Moses and the Lamb? What will
the final deliverance have to do with Moses? Is it possible that the final deliverance will
follow the same pattern as the events of the Exodus?

Introduction

The book of Revelation describes seven devastating plagues that will fall upon planet earth after
the door of human probation closes (Revelation 15:5-8). These plagues will partially return the
earth to the condition that it was in before creation week—without form and void and in
darkness (Jeremiah 4:19-27). In our study today I would like us to study the final three of these
plagues.

We will do our study of this subject from three different perspectives and look for parallels in
the thematic structure: (1) Revelation 16:10-21; (2) Exodus 14 and 15 and (3) the book The Great
Controversy, pp. 635-637

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 103 of 369
Model #1: Revelation 16:10-21

Fifth Plague

Revelation 16:10, 11: Central theme: Darkness on the kingdom of the beast and sores and
gnawing the tongue.

Revelation 16:10, 11: “Then the fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and
his kingdom became full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues because of the pain. They
blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and did not repent of their
deeds.”

Important questions about the fifth plague:

 Who is the beast?

This is the same beast of Revelation 13 and the little horn of Daniel 7 that spoke
blasphemies against the Most High, persecuted the saints of the Most High, thought it
could change times and law and ruled for 1260 years.

 The throne is the center of government where the beast rules from. This plague falls on
the governing authority of the beast. His center of power is in Vatican City within the
confines of the ancient city of Rome.

 The kingdom over which the beast rules is worldwide.

Revelation 13:3: “And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his
deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast.”

Revelation 13:7: “It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome
them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.”

Revelation 17:1, 2: “Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and
talked with me, saying to me, "Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who
sits on many waters, 2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the
inhabitants of the earth were made drunk with the wine of her fornication."

Revelation 17:15: “Then he said to me: "The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits,
are peoples, multitudes, nations, and tongues.”

Notice that there is a clear distinction between the ruling authority and his kingdom.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 104 of 369
  Darkness (this is a supernatural global darkness because the beast’s kingdom is global).

 They gnaw their tongues in pain and God sends them a panic that will lead them to kill
one another with the weapons they were going to use to destroy God’s people.

Zechariah 14:12, 13: “And this shall be the plague with which the LORD will strike all the
people who fought against Jerusalem. Their flesh shall dissolve while they stand on their
feet, their eyes shall dissolve in their sockets, and their tongues shall dissolve in their
mouths. 13 It shall come to pass in that day that a great panic from the LORD will be among
them. Everyone will seize the hand of his neighbor, and raise his hand against his
neighbor's hand.”

 No room for repentance—this is after the close of probation.

Sixth Plague
Revelation 16:12-16: Central themes: Waters of the Euphrates dries up thus preparing the way
for the arrival of the Kings from the East

“Then the sixth angel poured out his bowl on the great river Euphrates, and its water was dried
up, so that the way of the kings from the east might be prepared.”

Important Questions about the sixth plague:

 What is represented by the great river Euphrates? (hint: Isaiah 8:7, 8; 17:12, 13)
 What is meant by the drying up of its waters?
 Who are the kings from the east (‘the rising sun’) and how is the way prepared for their
arrival?

The Old Testament background

In order to answer these questions, we must study the story of the fall of ancient Babylon. The
story is found in Daniel 5, Jeremiah 50 and 51 and Isaiah 41 and the descriptions given by the
historians Xenophon and Herodotus

 The Euphrates River was the greatest asset of Babylon and also its greatest potential
liability.
 Babylon was practicing idolatry and drinking wine the night of its fall.
 Cyrus came with his armies from the north and from the east.
 He dried up the riverbed of the Euphrates by diverting it to the channels that had been
built outside the city.
 Cyrus and his armies entered the city and Babylon fell.
 God’s people were delivered.
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 105 of 369
This entire scenario is applied symbolically and globally in Revelation
chapter 17

Questions about Revelation 17:

 Which of the seven angels speaks to John in Revelation 17:1?

 What does a harlot represent in Scripture (Ezekiel chapters 16 and 23)?
 What does prophecy mean when it says that she fornicates with the kings of the earth?
 What is the name of the harlot woman?
 What are the waters upon which the harlot sits?
 What will the kings end up doing with the harlot?

Revelation 17:1, 2: The harlot woman sits on many waters

“Then one of the seven angels [which one?] who had the seven bowls came and talked with me,
saying to me: ‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who sits on many waters,
with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth were
made drunk with the wine of her fornication.’”

Revelation 17:5: Name of the woman is Babylon

“And on her forehead a name was written: MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF
HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.”

Revelation 17:15: The waters represent the kingdom of the harlot because she sits on them like
the beast sits on the throne.

“Then he said to me, "The waters which you saw, where the harlot sits, are peoples, multitudes,
nations, and tongues.”

Revelation 17:16: The kings will hate the harlot and make her desolate, naked and burn her with
fire.

“And the ten horns which you saw on the beast, these will hate the harlot, make her desolate and
naked, eat her flesh and burn her with fire.”

Seventh Plague

Revelation 16:17-21: Central themes God’s voice saying “it is done” followed by an earthquake,
thunder, lightning, terrific precipitation and the disappearance of mountain ranges and islands.

“Then the seventh angel poured out his bowl into the air, and a loud voice came out of the temple
of heaven, from the throne, saying, "It is done!" 18 And there were noises and thunderings and
lightnings; and there was a great earthquake, such a mighty and great earthquake as had not
occurred since men were on the earth. 19 Now the great city was divided into three parts, and

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 106 of 369
the cities of the nations fell. And great Babylon was remembered before God, to give her the cup
of the wine of the fierceness of His wrath. 20 Then every island fled away, and the mountains were
not found. 21 And great hail from heaven fell upon men, each hailstone about the weight of a
talent. Men blasphemed God because of the plague of the hail, since that plague was exceedingly
great.”

Model #2: Exodus 14, 15

The fall of Babylon in the days of Belshazzar is the in the background of the fifth, sixth and seventh
plagues. But I want to suggest that there is another story in the Old Testament that also stands
in the background—the story of the Exodus of Israel from Egypt.

The Captivity and Flight

 Israel was captive in Egypt.

 God said to Pharaoh “Let my people go.”
 Captivity was made difficult because the people wanted to keep the Sabbath.
 God’s people came out.

Shut in and no Escape

 Exodus 14:3: After God’s people came out they shut in and there appeared to be no
escape.
 Exodus 14:5-9: Pharaoh prepares to attack.

The Fifth Plague: Darkness

 Exodus 14:19, 20: Darkness upon the Egyptians and light upon God’s people.

The Sixth Plague: Waters dry up or divided and then slay the Egyptians

 Exodus 14:21: Waters divided and dry up.

 Exodus 14:26-28: Waters slay the Egyptians.

Seventh Plague: Natural Calamities

 Psalm 77:16-20: The ‘natural’ phenomena that accompanied this event are exactly
parallel to the seventh plague in the book of Revelation.
 Exodus 14:23-25: A great panic fell upon the Egyptians. They forgot their murderous rage
against Israel and sought to escape.
 Exodus 14:17, 18: The honor and glory for the deliverance went to God.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 107 of 369
  In fighting the people of God the Egyptians were fighting the God of the people. This must
be understood in the context of the covenant. Israel was in a covenant relationship with
God and therefore He had promised to protect them.
 The voice from heaven told Saul on the road to Damascus: “Why do you persecute Me?”
In persecuting the church Saul was persecuting Christ.
 Matthew 25: Jesus said in Matthew 25: “In that you have done it unto one of these the
least My brethren, you have done it unto Me.”
 In antiquity a Suzerain was required to protect a vassal who had entered a covenant
relationship with him.
 The good Shepherd in the Old Testament protected his sheep.
 The head looks out for the good of the body.
 The husband is committed to protecting his wife because of the marriage covenant (see
Jeremiah 31:32).

After God’s victory over Pharaoh and his armies, Israel sand the Song of Moses (Exodus 15).

Model #3: The Perspective of Ellen G. White

As is frequently her custom, Ellen White does not quote the verses for the fifth and sixth plagues
but she interprets the symbols in matter of fact language and follows the same literary
arrangement.

An example Revelation 4 and 5:

 One on the throne (not identified by name).

 Four living creatures (presented in symbolic terms).
 24 elders (symbolic language).
 Seven lamps (symbolic language).
 Lamb as though it had been slain (symbolic language).

In The Desire of Ages, pp. 833-835 Ellen White interprets the symbolic language of Revelation 4
and 5:

 The one on the throne is the Father.

 The four living creatures are cherubim and seraphim.
 The 24 elders are the representatives of the worlds that never sinned.
 The seven lamps of fire represent the Holy Spirit.
 The Lamb as though it had been slain is Jesus Christ.

Ellen White does the same thing with Daniel 11:40-45. She never quotes these verses or even
alludes to the language. Yet she comments on this passage in The Great Controversy with luxury
of detail.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 108 of 369
Let’s notice how Ellen White interprets the fifth, sixth and seventh plagues in matter of fact
language. I have added explanatory remarks in brackets:

The Great Controversy, p. 635:

“When the protection of human laws shall be withdrawn from those who honor the law of God,
there will be, in different lands, a simultaneous movement for their destruction [similar to
Pharaoh who gathers his armies to attack Israel]. As the time appointed in the decree [Revelation
13:15; Esther 3:8] draws near, the people will conspire to root out the hated sect. It will be
determined to strike in one night a decisive blow, which shall utterly silence the voice of dissent
and reproof.

The people of God--some in prison cells, some hidden in solitary retreats in the forests and the
mountains--still plead for divine protection [like Israel did at the edge of the Red Sea], while in
every quarter companies of armed men, urged on by hosts of evil angels are preparing for the
work of death [Pharaoh and his armies come and there is no escape]. It is now, in the hour of
utmost extremity that the God of Israel [notice the allusion to ancient Israel] will interpose for
the deliverance of His chosen. . .

With shouts of triumph, jeering, and imprecation, throngs of evil men are about to rush [the
Euphrates is at flood stage: See the meaning of the word rush in Isaiah 17:12, 13 and 8:7, 8] upon
their prey, when, lo, a dense blackness, deeper than the darkness of the night, falls upon the earth
[the fifth plague of darkness]. Then a rainbow, shining with the glory from the throne of God,
spans the heavens and seems to encircle each praying company [light for God’s people]. The
angry multitudes [symbolically represented as the ‘waters’ upon which the harlot sits] are
suddenly arrested [the waters of the Euphrates are dried up]. Their mocking cries die away. The
objects of their murderous rage are forgotten. With fearful forebodings they gaze upon the
symbol of God's covenant and long to be shielded from its overpowering brightness. . .

In the next chapter (‘The Desolation of the earth’) Ellen White comes
back to describe this climactic moment but adds some very important
details:

“The people see that they have been deluded. They accuse one another of having led them to
destruction; but all unite in heaping their bitterest condemnation upon the ministers [who are
the leaders of the harlot and her daughters]. Unfaithful pastors have prophesied smooth things
[this is why the fifth plague afflicts the tongue]; they have led their hearers to make void the law
of God and to persecute those who would keep it holy. Now, in their despair, these teachers
confess before the world their work of deception. The multitudes [the waters of the Red Sea and
the Euphrates] are filled with fury [they withdraw their support and then avalanche themselves
against the apostate system]. "We are lost!" they cry, "and you are the cause of our ruin;" and
they turn upon the false shepherds. The very ones that once admired them most will pronounce
the most dreadful curses upon them. The very hands that once crowned them with laurels will be
raised for their destruction. The swords which were to slay God's people are now employed to

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 109 of 369
destroy their enemies [Zechariah 14:12, 13 is fulfilled when the swords turn upon the religious
leaders]. Everywhere there is strife and bloodshed. The Great Controversy, p. 655, 656

"And this shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against
Jerusalem; Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall
consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth. And it shall
come to pass in that day, that a great tumult from the Lord shall be among them; and they shall
lay hold everyone on the hand of his neighbor, and his hand shall rise up against the hand of his
neighbor." Zechariah 14:12, 13. In the mad strife of their own fierce passions, and by the awful
outpouring of God's unmingled wrath, fall the wicked inhabitants of the earth--priests, rulers, and
people, rich and poor, high and low. "And the slain of the Lord shall be at that day from one end
of the earth even unto the other end of the earth: they shall not be lamented, neither gathered,
nor buried." Jeremiah 25:33.” The Great Controversy, p. 657

At the bottom of page 636 and top of 637 Ellen White comments on the
seventh plague:

“In the midst of the angry heavens is one clear space of indescribable glory, whence comes the
voice of God like the sound of many waters, saying: "It is done." Revelation 16:17.

That voice shakes the heavens and the earth. There is a mighty earthquake, "such as was not
since men were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake, and so great." Verses 17, 18 The
firmament appears to open and shut. The glory from the throne of God seems flashing through.
The mountains shake like a reed in the wind, and ragged rocks are scattered on every side. There
is a roar as of a coming tempest. The sea is lashed into fury. There is heard the shriek of a hurricane
like the voice of demons upon a mission of destruction. The whole earth heaves and swells like
the waves of the sea. Its surface is breaking up. Its very foundations seem to be giving way.
Mountain chains are sinking. Inhabited islands disappear. The seaports that have become like
Sodom for wickedness are swallowed up by the angry waters. Babylon the great has come in
remembrance before God, "to give unto her the cup of the wine of the fierceness of His wrath."
Great hailstones, every one "about the weight of a talent," are doing their work of destruction.”
Verses 19, 21

In The Great Controversy, pp. 648, 649 explains that the 144,000 sing the Song of Moses and the
Lamb, the song of their deliverance from Babylon.

Final question: What will determine whose side you are on in this great battle?

Revelation 16:15: "Behold, I am coming as a thief. Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his
garments lest he walk naked and they see his shame."

Revelation 3:18: “I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and
white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed;
and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 110 of 369
Revelation 22:10-15: “And he said to me, "Do not seal the words of the prophecy of this book, for
the time is at hand. 11 He who is unjust, let him be unjust still; he who is filthy, let him be filthy
still; he who is righteous, let him be righteous still; he who is holy, let him be holy still." 12 "And
behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to everyone according to his work.
13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last." 14 Blessed

are those who do His commandments that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may
enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral
and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 111 of 369
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 112 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #12 – NOTES ON DANIEL 6

Introductory Matters

The events of this chapter occurred sometime between 539 and 537 BC. Daniel was around 84
years old at this time.

There is a close relationship between Daniel 3 and Daniel 6. In Daniel 3 King Nebuchadnezzar
attempted to impose false worship but in Daniel 6 King Darius attempted to forbid true worship.
Thus they established and forbade the free exercise of religion.

Daniel was absent in the experience of Daniel 3. We do not know where he was at that time.
Some think that he might have been ill, that the king purposely told him to stay away or that he
was on some mission. Only God knows why. However, the experience of Daniel 6 shows that if
Daniel had been there, he would have chosen to be faithful.

The Historical Experience of Daniel 6

Daniel was full of the Holy Spirit (Daniel 6:3; see also Daniel 4:8, 9; 5:12, 14).

Daniel had the Spirit of Prophecy. Notice that both Daniel and Ellen White had similar experiences
while they were in vision (see Daniel 10:8, 16-19). Both Daniel and Ellen White had a passion to
understand Daniel 8:14.

Daniel was faithful in his secular duties (Daniel 6:4) and therefore proved himself faithful when
the large test came. He had no fault (a better translation would be ‘corruption’) in the
performance of his daily duties in the king’s court. He was totally trustworthy.

Daniel kept God’s law even at the risk of death (Daniel 6:5). The law was the key issue of the
conflict, primarily the first table. Notice that Daniel’s enemies could find no violation of the
second table of the law by Daniel and therefore sought to legislate the first table. There is a
conflict here between the laws of God and the laws of men.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 113 of 369
Another issue in this controversy was worship. While in Daniel 3 Babylon sought to establish false
worship and disobedience to God’s law, in Daniel 6 Medo-Persia sought to forbid the free
exercise of Daniel’s right to worship God according to the dictates of his conscience (Daniel 6:5,
12, 15).

Daniel had an unbreakable and unshakeable faith in his God (in the LXX, Daniel 6:23 uses the
same Greek word for ‘faith’ as is found in Revelation 14:12).

The enemies of Daniel worked in an underhanded way to deceive the civil power into proclaiming
a religious decree forbidding true worship. In this, Darius overstepped his legitimate bounds of
authority—he legislated the first table which is God’s exclusive domain.

The decree forbidding true worship was given by the civil power in written form (Daniel 6:7-9).
Thus we have the civil power legislating the affairs of God. It is important to realize that the king
was not Daniel’s enemy. The king only became a menace to Daniel when he listened to the advice
of his counselors who were enemies of Daniel.

Daniel was a man of prayer (Daniel 6:10, 11). After stating that Daniel knelt for prayer three times
a day, Ellen White makes the following profound remark:

“True reverence for God is inspired by a sense of His infinite greatness and a realization of His
presence.” Prophet and Kings, pp. 48, 49

Why didn’t Daniel just close his windows so as not to offend his enemies? After all, isn’t religion
a private affair? Why ruffle the feathers of his enemies? Ellen White responds:

“As Daniel, according to his custom, made his supplications three times a day to the God of
heaven, the attention of the princes and rulers was called to his case. He had an opportunity to
speak for himself, to show who is the true God, and to present the reason why He alone should
receive worship, and the duty of rendering Him praise and homage. And the deliverance of Daniel
from the den of lions was another evidence that the Being whom he worshiped was the true and
living God.” Testimonies for the Church, Volume 5 p. 453

This story reveals that the power of human rulers is limited. When Darius gave this decree, he
sought to reveal his ‘almighty power’. But once he signed the decree, he became the slave of his
own law, he was bound by his own decree and could not deliver Daniel no matter how much he
tried. This made it necessary for One who is truly Almighty to deliver Daniel. The intervention of
God shows that He overrules the erroneous decisions of human kings and can do what they never
could.

Why did God allow Daniel, His beloved servant, to be thrown into the lion’s den? Why not deliver
him right before he was cast in? Notice the profound explanation given in Prophets and Kings,
pp. 543, 544:

“God did not prevent Daniel's enemies from casting him into the lions' den; He permitted evil
angels and wicked men thus far to accomplish their purpose; but it was that He might make the
deliverance of His servant more marked, and the defeat of the enemies of truth and righteousness

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 114 of 369
more complete. "Surely the wrath of man shall praise Thee" (Psalm 76:10), the psalmist has
testified. Through the courage of this one man who chose to follow right rather than policy, Satan
was to be defeated, and the name of God was to be exalted and honored.”

Daniel had to face a death decree because he chose to worship the true God and to violate the
religious decree of the civil power. He went through a severe time of trouble and his faith was
sorely tested. Yet Daniel passed the test with flying colors. From the time of his arrival in Babylon,
Daniel had made up his mind that he would be faithful to God no matter what happened (see
Pastor Bohr’s Notes on Daniel One).

Daniel’s enemies suffered the very fate that they had determined for him (Daniel 6:24, 25). When
the king discovered what his advisors were up to, he was filled with wrath against them. The civil
power which was to punish Daniel now turned on the enemies of Daniel.

The word ‘deliver’ is at the very core of Daniel 6. It is used in Daniel 6:14, 16, 20 and 27. It is also
used several times in Daniel 3. The only other place it is used is in Daniel 12:1. This indicates that
these three stories are intimately related.

Daniel was delivered because he had a covenant relationship with his God (see Daniel 6:22). He
stood innocent before God.

At the end of this story, Darius still did not get the point that the state cannot legislate in matters
related to God. His decree that everyone ‘tremble and fear before the God of Daniel’ was well
intended but illegitimate. A political ruler can no more legislate the worship of the true God than
he can the worship of a false god (see Daniel 6:26)

Daniel represents the end time remnant of God which will possess the same character and
mission as Daniel. But the end-time remnant will witness to spiritual Babylon.

1. The final remnant will have the testimony of Jesus which is the spirit of prophecy
(Revelation 12:17; 19:10; 22:8, 9). It is not accidental that Ellen White’s experience while
in vision was very similar to Daniel’s. Neither is it coincidental that both were extremely
interested in understanding and proclaiming the prophecy of Daniel 8:14.
2. The final remnant will keep the commandments of God (Revelation 12:17; 14:12) and this
will awaken the wrath of their enemies.
3. The final remnant will worship the true Creator (Revelation 14:7) and will refuse to
worship the beast or his image (Revelation 14:9-11). Once again, the issue will be
worship.
4. In the final crisis the remnant will have the faith of Jesus (Revelation 14:12)

God’s end time remnant will be filled with the Holy Spirit in the latter rain (Joel 2:28-32;
Revelation 14:14-18; 18:1-5).

The end time remnant will be faithful in the daily duties of life. They will be honest and
trustworthy in the small things and thus will stand firm when the big test comes (on this principle
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 115 of 369
see Luke 16:10; Jeremiah 12:5). For example, if we are not faithful in our tithe now, what makes
us think that we will be willing to give up everything, including life, when the final test comes? If
we are not faithful in our Sabbath observance now, how will we be willing to give up our lives
over this same issue later? We cannot allow anyone to find fault with us in any of our business
transactions or other duties of our daily lives. How can we claim to be faithful to God whom we
cannot see if we are unfaithful to our fellow human beings whom we can see?

Faithfulness to God’s law will be the central issue in the final conflict, primarily the first table. But
note: The wicked will not be able to find any fault in our observance of the second table so they
will accuse us with regards to the first table.

Another related issue in the final conflict will be worship. The first amendment to the Constitution
states: ‘Congress shall make no law neither respecting the establishment of religion nor
forbidding the free exercise thereof.’ At the end, the beast and his image will not only establish
religion (by enforcing Sunday observance), but will also forbid the free exercise of religion (by
forbidding Sabbath observance). Thus Sunday laws will eventually become anti-Sabbath laws.

God’s people in this crisis will have an unshakable and unbreakable faith like the faith that Jesus
had (see Revelation 14:12).

The religious leaders of the United States in particular and the world in general will deceive the
political rulers into thinking that the remnant is a threat to the welfare of the state (see John
11:50 and The Great Controversy, p. 615). They will persuade the presidents and rulers to
proclaim religious laws. They will legislate the first table of God’s law which is totally illegitimate.

The final worship decree will be written and ‘notarized’ by the political rulers of the world (see
Revelation 13:15 and Esther 3:8).

God’s people must be a people of prayer. Ellen White explains that in the time of trouble God’s
people will cry out day and night for their deliverance (see The Great Controversy, p. 630). Like
Jacob, they will not let go until they have the absolute assurance of God’s acceptance.

Why will God allow His people to through this terrible time of tribulation? Why doesn’t God
simply remove them from earth to heaven before the time of trial? Ellen White explains:

"The wrath of man shall praise Thee," says the psalmist; "the remainder of wrath shalt Thou
restrain." God means that testing truth shall be brought to the front and become a subject of
examination and discussion, even if it is through the contempt placed upon it. The minds of the
people must be agitated. Every controversy, every reproach, every slander, will be God's means
of provoking inquiry and awakening minds that otherwise would slumber.” Testimonies for the
Church, Volume 5 p. 453

In Ezekiel 38 and 39 when the wicked come against God’s people, the Lord does not prevent
them. He allows them to surround the city so that God’s glorious deliverance of His people can
be seen by the entire universe.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 116 of 369
Once again it will be seen that the power of the wicked rulers of the world is limited. Their laws
will appear to be irrevocable. It will appear as if God’s people are at the point of being annihilated
but God will intervene to deliver when men could not do so. It is no coincidence that Ellen White
describes the moment of deliverance in the chapter titled: “God’s People Delivered” (see The
Great Controversy, p. 635).

God’s people will come face to face with a death decree (Revelation 13:15) because they insist
on worshiping God as He has commanded. This will lead to a time of trouble such as has never
been seen in the history of the world (see The Great Controversy, pp. 613-634).

The wicked will suffer the same fate which they desired for the righteous. The kings of the earth
will turn on the harlot (Revelation 17:16, 17; The Great Controversy, pp. 655, 656).

God’s people will be in a covenant relationship with their Lord and this will guarantee their
protection. The final fulfillment of this experience is in Daniel 11:44, 45. There, the king of the
north (the same as the little horn, the beast and the man of sin) will go out to slay God’s people.
At that moment, Michael will stand up to DELIVER His people who are in a covenant relationship
with Him.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 117 of 369
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 118 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #13 – NOTES ON DANIEL 7

Introductory matters

Daniel received the vision of Daniel 7 in the first year of King Belshazzar. This would be 553 BC
just fourteen years before the fall of Babylon in the year 539.

The great controversy theme is at the very center of the book of Daniel in general and of Daniel
7 in particular. This central theme can be described in the following way:

Since the inception of sin in heaven, there has been an invisible, cosmic controversy between
Christ and Satan. Although this is heavenly conflict, it is reflected on Earth in a visible battle
between the followers of Christ and the followers of Satan. In the course of this battle, Satan and
his wicked followers have appeared to prevail over God and is people, but in the end God and his
people will prevail because he controls and guides history to its desired end.

The passive voice of many of the verbs of Daniel 7 clearly points to someone who is directing
history from behind the scenes. We will notice this when we do a verse by verse study of the
chapter.

The Links between Daniel Two and Daniel Seven

Before anything else is said, we must recognize that historicism should be the governing principle
in the study both outlines (See the charts at the end of this material, ‘The Four Prophetic Outlines
of Daniel’, and ‘Sequence of Powers in Daniel 2, 7 and Revelation 13.’

There are several reasons for linking Daniel 2 and Daniel 7: First of all, in the chiastic structure of
the book of Daniel, chapters 2 and 7 are on the same branch of the candelabra (See ‘The Literary
Structure of Daniel 1-7’) Secondly, Daniel 2 and Daniel 7 have the same number of basic
elements. Daniel 2 has four metals and Daniel 7 has four beasts. Notice how the enumeration of
the basic elements is the same in both chapters:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 119 of 369
 Daniel 2 Daniel 7
‘Gold’ Lion (7:4)
‘After thee’ Bear = ‘second’ (7:5)
‘Third’ Leopard = ‘another’ (7:6)
‘Fourth’ Dragon = ‘fourth’ (7:7)

In the third place, the Iron characterizes the fourth kingdom in both lists. In Daniel 2 the legs are
of iron and in Daniel 7 the dragon beast has great teeth of iron. A fourth consideration is that
Daniel 2:44, 45 and Daniel 7:14 describe the last kingdom—the everlasting kingdom—with very
similar terminology. In both, the everlasting kingdom follows the fourth power in the sequence.

A Look at the Literary Structure of Daniel Seven

Without exception, earthly events in Daniel 7 are described in prose while heavenly events are
described in poetry. In Hebrew thinking, extremely important events are frequently depicted in
poetic language. We will see in our study of Daniel 7 that earthly events are not isolated from
heavenly events. There is a close connection indeed between heavenly and earthly events:

Verses 2-8 Earth Prose

Verses 9-10 Heaven Poetry
Verses 11-12 Earth Prose
Verses 13-14 Heaven Poetry
Verses 15-22 Earth Prose
Verses 23-27 Heaven Poetry

The vision of Daniel 7 is structurally divided into four parts, each concluding with the setting up
of the everlasting kingdom:

Vision: Daniel 7:1-14: The full vision in its chronological sequence.

Explanation: Daniel 7:15-18: Daniel wants to know the meaning of the vision. An angel gives a
brief explanation ending with the eternal kingdom.

Inquiry: Daniel 7:19-22: Daniel desires to know about the fourth beast, the ten horns, the
little horn and the everlasting kingdom.

Explanation: Daniel 7:23-27: The angel provides the final and fullest explanation of the fourth
beast, the ten horns, the little horn and the everlasting kingdom.

Daniel 7:9-10, 22, and 26 clearly reveal that the judgment occurs immediately after, and as a
result of, the malignant work of the little horn in Daniel 7: 8, 21, and 25. This means that the
judgment could not have taken place at the cross or in apostolic times or even when a person
dies. The judgment must have begun sometime after 1798.

Another important structural item of Daniel 7 is that the fourth beast has three periods of
existence. First it rules for a period by itself. Then ten horns grow from its head. Finally, after the
ten horns have governed for a period of time, a little horn arises among them to rule over them.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 120 of 369
This clearly shows that Rome would rule in three consecutive stages (see Daniel 7:23-24). In
Revelation we will find that Rome will have a fourth stage when the beast’s deadly wound is
healed.

It is also important to remember that the judgment in Daniel 7 has three distinct stages:

 INVESTIGATIVE: The books are opened (Daniel 7: 9, 10).

 VERDICT OR SENTENCE: Given in favor of the saints (Daniel 7: 22).
 The time came when the saints POSSESSED the kingdom. It is clear that the judgment has
an investigative stage, a sentencing stage and an execution stage (Daniel 7:22, last part).

Not only does each outline of Daniel expand upon the previous outlines, but each outline also
enlarges upon itself as the chapter progresses. For example, as we have already seen, Daniel 7
repeats the same events four times yet each time the final events of the outline are amplified
and intensified. The interest of Daniel is clearly focused on the end-time. The first powers of the
outline are brought to view primarily to give us a sequence and framework for end-time events.
For an exemplification of this, see the chart at the end of this material, “A Synoptic View of the
Four Parts of Daniel 7".

A Verse by Verse Study of Daniel Seven

Verse 1:

The date for this chapter, as we have already seen, is 553. The text clearly states that Daniel had
a dream and visions of his head upon his bed. This is what we might call a ‘prophetic dream’.
Daniel also had ‘prophetic visions’ while he was awake. It is remarkable that Ellen White also had
both kinds of prophetic communications from the Lord.

Verse 2:

‘Winds’ in prophetic language are symbolic of strife, war, bloodshed and destruction. Jeremiah,
a contemporary of Daniel, makes this very clear in Jeremiah 25:31-33. Ezekiel, another of Daniel’s
contemporaries, also affirms the same (Ezekiel 7:1-2). In Revelation 7:1-4 when the four angels
release the winds, the result is a universal conflagration and destruction (Revelation 6:12-17).
Concerning the ‘winds’, Ellen White remarks:

“Winds are a symbol of strife. The four winds of heaven striving upon the great sea represent the
terrible scenes of conquest and revolution by which kingdoms have attained to power.” The Great
Controversy, p. 440

The ‘sea’ symbolizes multitudes of unconverted peoples who are inimical to the people of God
(see, Isaiah 17:12-13; 8:7-8; 60:5; Revelation 17:15). When symbolic winds and waters are placed
together the meaning is, ‘nations which are warring for world dominion.’ It is of great importance
that these four beasts arise from the sea, while the winds of strife are blowing. In contrast,
Revelation 13:11 depicts a beast which arises from the earth, where there are no waters and no
winds!!
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 121 of 369
Verse 3:

Several things must be taken into account when we examine this verse.

1) Do the four beasts represent four kings or four kingdoms? The answer is simple. The four
beasts represent four kingdoms which were ruled over by a succession of kings (study
carefully, Daniel 2:37-39; 7:17, 23; 8:20-22; Revelation 17:12; 20:4-6; 1:5-6).

2) Why are wild beasts employed as symbols? Notice the following inspired comment:

“Earthly governments prevail by physical force; they maintain their dominion by war; but
the founder of the new kingdom is the Prince of Peace. The Holy Spirit represents worldly
kingdoms under the symbol of fierce beasts of prey; but Christ is ‘the Lamb of God, which
taketh away the sin of the world.’” Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 77

In this context it is significant that the two beasts of Daniel 8, in contrast to the four beasts
of chapter seven, are domestic sanctuary animals (more on this when we study Daniel 8).

3) It is worthy of notice that the fulfillment of prophecy moves from east to west. The lion
and bear are powers which bear sway in Asia. The leopard governs toward the eastern
part of Western Europe and the dragon rules in the western portion of Western Europe.
When we study Revelation, we will see that the second beast of Revelation 13 rules west
of Europe (the United States of America). While Protestant eyes are fixed on the east as
the place for the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, it is fulfilling in the west right before their
eyes and they can’t see it because they are looking in the wrong place!!

Verse 4:

The lion represents Babylon. Everything connected with Babylon is ‘top of the line’. Gold is the
most precious metal, the lion is the king of beasts, the eagle is the king of birds, etc. Archeological
excavations have proven that lion sphinxes were very common in ancient Babylon. Jeremiah
affirms that the lion represents Babylon (see, Jeremiah 4:7; 50:17).

‘Wings’ in Bible prophecy represent speed of conquest (see Ezekiel 17:3, 12; Lamentations 4:19;
Habakkuk 1:6-8). The plucking of the wings symbolizes the reality that Babylon will no longer be
swift to conquer the nations. A lion with a man’s heart is cowardly (even though fictional, the
story of the Wizard of Oz picks up on this. Richard the Lionhearted, king of England, was so called
because of his great courage). Babylon’s cowardice is clearly displayed by King Belshazzar when
the kingdom fell to the Medes and Persians (see Daniel 5:6).

Notice the passive verbs in this verse: ‘wings were plucked’, ‘it was lifted up,’ it ‘was made to
stand,’ and ‘a man’s heart was given to it’. It is clear that someone else is guiding history!!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 122 of 369
Verse 5:

The bear symbolizes the kingdom of the Medes and Persians (Daniel 8:20). This is made clear in
Daniel 5 where the Medes and Persians are described as the conquerors of Babylon. The fact that
the bear was higher on one side than on the other indicates that one of these co-ruling kingdoms
was to be more powerful than the other. This is made clear in Daniel 8:3 where we are told that
the ram has two horns and the highest one comes out last. This is remarkably true to history.
When the kingdom began, the Medes were dominant but at the end the kingdom was ruled
exclusively by Persian kings and the Medes receded into the background (see the chart at the
end of this material, ‘The Dynastic Succession of the Medes and Persians’.

The three ribs in the bear’s mouth represent the three provinces which the Medes and Persians
conquered in order to ascend to power: 1) Lydia (ancient Turkey/Anatolia) was conquered in 547.
2) Babylon, was overcome in 539 and, 3) Egypt, was forced to submit in 525.

Notice, once again, that someone is active behind the scenes of history: ‘they said unto it, Arise,
devour much flesh.’ It is obvious that someone is giving the Medes and Persians permission to
conquer. ‘They’ in this verse no doubt refers to the watchers or angels who are the emissaries of
God in the guidance of human events (compare Ezekiel 1 where the angels carry on God’s
redemptive purpose on earth).
Verse 6:

The leopard represents the kingdom of Greece. The leopard in itself is a swift animal, but this
leopard has wings. This must mean that Greece would conquer the world in a swifter fashion
than Babylon. And this is exactly what happened.

Alexander the Great conquered the whole Near East (from Egypt to the Indus Valley in India) in
just 3 years. Nebuchadnezzar took 13 years to just reach a stalemate with Tyre. In contrast,
Alexander conquered Tyre in just eight months.

It is important to underline that the leopard did not have the four heads when it began to rule.
How do we know this? The answer is, by a comparison of Daniel 7 with Daniel 8. In Daniel 8 the
he-goat (a symbol of Greece, 8:21) governed for a period with a notable horn on its head
(Alexander the Great). Only after the great horn was broken, did four others come out to replace
it. So, just as the he-goat governed for a period and then sprouted four horns, so, the leopard
ruled for a period and then it grew four heads. It is clear that the four heads and the four horns
came up after the leopard and he-goat had ruled for a period of time (see, Daniel 8:5-8).

In Daniel 7 the leopard was swift, but it was made even swifter by wings. In Daniel 8 the he-goat
is so swift he does not even touch the ground. Once again we are told that a power outside
history is guiding world affairs: ‘and dominion was given to it’. Notice that the leopard did not
take dominion. Rather, dominion was given to it!!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 123 of 369
Verse 7:

The dragon beast represents the Roman Empire (168 BC-476 AD). This empire came to be known
as the ‘iron monarchy of Rome’. Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the
Roman Empire, volume 4, p. 161
The ten horns represent the ten kingdoms into which the Roman Empire was divided when it fell
apart. These ten kingdoms, according to Edward Gibbon, were: The Alemanni, the Franks, the
Burgundians, the Vandals, the Suevi, the Visigoths, the Saxons, the Ostrogoths, the Lombards and
the Heruli (see, M. H. Brown, The Sure Word of Prophecy, pp. 54, 55).

“The historian Machiavel, without the slightest reference to this prophecy, gives the following list
of the nations which occupied the territory of the Western Empire at the time of the fall of
Romulus Augustulus [476 A. D], the last emperor of Rome: The Lombards, the Franks, the
Burgundians, the Ostrogoths, the Visigoths, the Vandals, the Heruli, the Sueves, the Huns, and the
Saxons: ten in all.” (H. Grattan Guinness, The Divine Program of the World’s History, p. 318)

Already in the fourth century, Jerome had spoken of the fragmentation of the Roman Empire in
the following terms:

“Moreover the fourth kingdom, which plainly pertains to the Romans, is the iron which breaks in
pieces and subdues all things. But its feet and toes are partly of iron and partly of clay, which at
this time [note that Jerome was living when this was happening] is most plainly attested. For just
as in its beginning nothing was stronger and more unyielding than the Roman Empire, so at the
end of its affairs nothing is weaker.” (Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, comments on 2:40, column
504).

In the days when Jerome lived, the Roman Empire was falling apart. The barbarian tribes from
the north had descended upon the empire with a vengeance and broke it up into the nations
which today constitute Western Europe.

Verse 8:

We must now take a closer look at the little horn. There are at least eleven identifying
characteristics in chapter seven:

1) The little horn arises from the fourth beast (Daniel 7:8). The fourth beast represents
Rome, so the little horn must be a Roman power.
2) The little horn arises among the ten horns. The ten horns are the divisions of Western
Europe, so the little horn must arise in Western Europe (Daniel 7:8). Notice that these
first two characteristics restrict the geographical location of the little horn to Western
Europe.
3) The little horn rises after the ten horns (Daniel 7:24). According to historians, the ten
horns were complete in the year 476 AD, so this must mean that the little horn was to
arise to power sometime after 476 AD.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 124 of 369
 4) The little horn was to pluck up three of the first [ten] horns by the roots (Daniel 7:8).
This means that these three nations would be uprooted from history. Daniel 7:20-21
explains that three of the first horns would fall before the little horn, and Daniel 7:24 tells
us that the little horn would subdue three horns. In other words, three of the first ten
nations would disappear from history!!
5) The little horn was to speak great words against the Most High (Daniel 7:21, 25).
Revelation 13:5 explains what these words would be, namely, blasphemy. And, what is
blasphemy according to the Bible? It is when a merely human power claims to be God on
earth and when it thinks it can exercise the prerogatives and functions of God (see, John
10:30-33; Mark 2:7).
6) The little horn was to be a persecuting power against God’s people. This is stated in Daniel
7:21 and repeated in verse 25.
7) The little horn would think it could change God’s ‘times’, that is to say, God’s timetable
of prophetic events. (Daniel 2:21). We shall see that the little horn invented false systems
of prophetic interpretation to rival historicism.
8) The little horn would even have the audacity to THINK that it could change God’s holy
law. (Daniel 7:25).
9) The little horn would be different from the ten horns. It would be an amalgamation of
church and state (Daniel 7:24).
10) This power would govern for a time, times and half a time (Daniel 7:25). This comes out
to 42 months or 1260 days (see, Revelation 13:5-6; 12:6, 13-15). In Bible prophecy, literal
days are symbolic of years, so this power was to govern for 1260 years (we will study the
year/day principle later on in this material).
11) The little horn had eyes like a man. In Bible Prophecy, eyes are symbolic of wisdom (see,
Ephesians 1:18; Revelation 5:6). Even today, an owl is a symbol of wisdom because of its
large eyes. In other words, this power was to depend on human wisdom.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC PAPACY AS THE FULFILLMENT OF THE LITTLE HORN

PROPHECY:

Characteristic #1: The Papacy is Roman in all its dimensions. Notice the following:

1) The clay in the feet of the image of Daniel 2 represents the church. But notice that the feet
also have the iron of the legs. This must mean that the religious system which succeeds the
Roman Empire will continue to be Roman.
2) The religion of the Roman Catholic Papacy was inherited from Rome. It is well known that
Constantine the Great brought all sorts of pagan practices into the church. This is recognized
by both secular and church historians. In fact, the name ‘Supreme Pontiff’ (Pontifex Maximus)
was used by the pagan Roman emperors. After the Edict of Milan was signed in the year 312

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 125 of 369
 A. D., Christians were restored as bona fide citizens of the Roman Empire. The result of this is
described by Dave Hunt:

“Freedom at last from persecution seemed like a gift from God. Unfortunately, it set the stage for
an apostasy that would envelop Christendom for more than a millennium. Christ’s bride had been
wedded to paganism.” (Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, pp. 202-203)

Constantine, emperor of the Roman Empire, was the architect of this Edict of Milan (313 A. D.)
Regarding Constantine, Hunt remarks:

“A brilliant military commander, Constantine also understood that there could be no political
stability without religious unity. Yet to accomplish that feat would require a union between
paganism and Christianity. How could it be accomplished? The Empire needed an ecumenical
religion that would appeal to every citizen in a multi-cultural society. Giving Christianity official
status was not enough to bring internal peace to the Empire: Christianity had to undergo a
transformation so that pagans could ‘convert’ without giving up their old beliefs and rituals.

Constantine himself exemplified this expediency. He adopted Christ as the new god that had given
him victory in the crucial battle at Milvian Bridge in 312 A. D., and brought him into Rome as its
conqueror. Yet, as Caesar, he continued to function as the Pontifex Maximus of the Empire’s
pagan priesthood, known as the Pontifical College. . . As a ‘Christian’ Emperor, he automatically
became the de facto civil head of the Christian church and seduced her with promises of power.
Thus began the destruction of Christianity and the process that created Roman Catholicism as it
is today.” (Dave Hunt, Global Peace, pp. 106-107)

“It was ‘Christianity’, in fact, which gave the Empire a unity and continuity that held it together
culturally and religiously. When the Empire later disintegrated politically under the onslaught of
the Barbarians, it was held together religiously by the all-pervasive presence of the Roman
Catholic Church with its ingenious ecumenical blend of paganism and Christianity still
headquartered in Rome.” (Dave Hunt, Global Peace, p. 110)

The great philosopher and historian, Will Durant, remarks:

“When Christianity conquered Rome, the ecclesiastical structure of the pagan church, the title
and vestments of the Pontifex Maximus, the worship of the Great Mother and a multitude of
comforting divinities, the sense of super-sensible presences everywhere, the joy or solemnity of
old festivals, and the pageantry of immemorial ceremony, passed like maternal blood into the
new religion, and captive Rome captured her conqueror. While Christianity converted the world,
the world converted Christianity. . .” (Will Durant, Civilization: Caesar and Christ, Volume 3, p.
657.

John Henry Cardinal Newman makes this admission:

“We are told in various ways by Eusebius, that Constantine, in order to recommend the new
religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been
accustomed in their own. It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 126 of 369
writers has made familiar to most of us. The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular
saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees, incense, lamps, and candles; votive
offerings on recovery from illness, holy water; asylums; holy days and seasons, use of calendars,
processions, blessings on the fields; sacerdotal vestments; the tonsure, the ring in marriage,
turning East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleisen, are
all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the church.” (Henry Cardinal Newman,
An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine, p. 373)
Philip Schaff, one of the greatest church historians ever to wield a pen, wrote the following:

“But the elevation of Christianity as the religion of the state presents also an opposite aspect to
our contemplation. It involved great risk of degeneracy to the church. The Roman state, with its
laws, institutions, and usages, was still deeply rooted in heathenism, and could not be
transformed by a magical stroke. The christianizing of the state amounted therefore in great
measure to a paganizing and secularizing of the church. The world overcame the church, as much
as the church overcame the world, and the temporal gain of Christianity was in many respects
cancelled by spiritual loss. The mass of the Roman Empire was baptized only with water, not with
the Spirit of the gospel, and it smuggled heathen manners and practices into the sanctuary under
a new name. The very combination of the cross with the military ensign by Constantine was the
most doubtful omen, portending an unhappy mixture of the temporal and the spiritual powers.”
(Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 3, p. 93, bold is mine)
3) The architecture at the Vatican is Roman. Recently, I made a visit to the ruins of the old
city of Rome and then on the same day visited Vatican City. The architecture is virtually
identical. Also, the old city of Rome was filled with statues of gods and heroes as is Vatican
City.
4) The Papal church is called the Roman Catholic Church.
5) The official language of the Vatican is Latin, the language of ancient Rome.
6) In official documents, the Vatican employs Roman numerals.
7) The headquarters of the Papacy is Vatican City, which is located in the geographical
location of ancient Rome. Says the Catholic Encyclopedia:

“It [Vatican City] is within the city of Rome, called the city of seven hills, that the entire
area of Vatican State proper is now confined”. (The Catholic Encyclopedia, Tomas Nelson
Publishers, 1976. Article: ‘Rome’)

8) Historians and theologians consistently emphasize that Papal Rome inherited and
perpetuated the Roman Empire but in a different way: It was a religious-political system.
Notice the following quotations from church historians and theologians:

“Within three centuries, the Roman Church had transformed the administrative organization of
the Roman Empire into an ecclesiastical system of bishoprics, dioceses, monasteries, colonies,
garrisons, schools, libraries, administrative centers, envoys, representatives, courts of justice, and
a criminal system of intricate laws all under the direct control of the pope. His Roman Palace, the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 127 of 369
Lateran, became the new Senate. The new senators were the cardinals. The bishops who lived in
Rome and the priests and deacons helped the pope to administer this new imperium.” (Malachi
Martin, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, p. 105, italics mine)

“The Roman Church in this way privily pushed itself into the place of the Roman World-Empire, of
which it is the actual continuation; the empire has not perished, but has only undergone a
transformation. . . That is no mere ‘clever remark,’ but the recognition of the true state of the
matter historically, and the most appropriate and fruitful way of describing the character of this
Church. It still governs the nations. . . It is a political creation, and as imposing as a World-Empire,
because [it is] the continuation of the Roman Empire. The Pope, who calls himself ‘King’ and
‘Pontifex Maximus,’ is Caesar’s successor.” (Adolph Harnack, What is Christianity? pp. 269-270)

“The Empire was falling into decay. The Barbarians knew that its life was failing, that the old
organism was worn out, and they hastened to take possession of the remains. From every
direction they came for the spoils. The Saxons and the Angles settled in Great Britain; the Franks
invaded Northern Gaul; the Visigoths made Spain and the region south of the Loire their own; the
Burgundians took possession of the upper valley of the Rhone; the Vandals made conquests in
Africa. The Ostrogoths and Lombards were waiting for their turn to come. Among these new
invaders, some were heretics, others were pagans. What is to become of the Church? Are its days
numbered, and is the Empire to bring it down as its companion into an open tomb?

No, the Church will not descend into the tomb. It will survive the Empire. It will have to pass
through days of distress. It will witness calamity after calamity, ruins heaped upon ruins. But in
the midst of the greatest sadness, it will receive precious consolations. One after another, these
barbarian peoples will submit to its laws, and will count it a glory to be the Church’s children. The
frontiers of the Church will be extended; its institutions, for a moment shaken by the Barbarians,
will be consolidated, developed, and will adapt themselves to their surroundings. The papacy,
most sorely tried of all, will make a new advance. At length a second empire will arise, and of this
empire the Pope will be the masterBmore than this, he will be the master of Europe. He will dictate
his orders to kings who will obey them.” (Joseph Turmel, The Latin Church in the Middle Ages, p.
v, vi. Emphasis supplied)

“The all-conquering barbarians were storming the gates of Augustine’s city when the saint died
in 430. The North African town of Hippo was one of the last imperial outposts to be attacked.
Rome had already gone under. Only four years before, St. Augustine’s City of God had laid the
theological groundwork for the church to step into the void left by the collapsing Roman Empire.”
(Douglas Auchincloss, City of God and Man, Time, 76 (December 12, 1960), p. 64, emphasis
supplied.

“The removal of the capital of the Empire from Rome to Constantinople in 330 left the Western
Church, practically free from imperial power, to develop its own form of organization. The Bishop
of Rome, in the seat of the Caesars, was now the greatest man in the West, and was soon forced
to become the political as well as the spiritual head. To the Western world Rome was still the
political capital—hence the whole habit of mind, all ambition, pride, and sense of glory, and every

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 128 of 369
social prejudice favored the evolution of the great city into the ecclesiastical capital. Civil as well
as religious disputes were referred to the successor of Peter for settlement. Again and again, when
barbarians attacked Rome, he was compelled to actually assume military leadership. Eastern
Emperors frequently recognized the high claims of the Popes in order to gain their assistance. It
is not difficult to understand, how, under these responsibilities, the primacy of the Bishop of Rome,
established in the pre-Constantine period, was emphasized and magnified after 313 [Edict of
Milan]. The importance of this fact must not be overlooked. The organization of the Church was
thus put on the same divine basis as the revelation of Christianity. This idea once accepted led
inevitably to the medieval Papacy.” Alexander Clarence Flick, The Rise of the Mediaeval Church
pp. 168, 169, emphasis supplied.

“During the whole medieval period there was in Rome a single spiritual and temporal authority
[the papacy] exercising powers which in the end exceeded those that had ever lain within the
grasp of the Roman emperor.” R. W. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle
Ages, volume 2, pp. 24-25 emphasis supplied.

“The papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman Empire, sitting crowned upon the
grave thereof.” (Thomas Hobbes, as quoted in, Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, p. 95)
emphasis supplied.

“Christian Rome was the legitimate successor of pagan Rome.... Christ had triumphed [and]
Rome was ready to extend its sway to the heavens themselves.” (W. H. C. Frend, The Rise of
Christianity, p. 773) emphasis supplied.

“The Roman Christian Church was a church of world-wide importance and power, and her bishop
the most influential. Out of the ruins of political Rome arose the great moral empire in the ‘giant
form’ of the Roman Church. In the marvelous rise of the Roman Church is seen in strong relief the
majestic office of the Bishop of Rome.” (Alexander Clarence Flick, The Rise of the Mediaeval
Church, p. 150) emphasis supplied

“When the Western empire fell into the hands of the barbarians, the Roman bishop was the only
surviving heir of this imperial past, or, in the well-known dictum of Hobbes, ‘the ghost of the
deceased Roman empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof.’” (Philip Schaff, History of the
Christian Church, vol. 3, p. 287) emphasis supplied

“Long before the fall of Rome, there had begun to grow up within the Roman Empire an
ecclesiastical state, which was shaping itself upon the imperial model. This spiritual empire, like
the secular empire, possessed a hierarchy of officers, of which deacons, priests or presbyters, and
bishops were the most important. . . . Another consequence of the fall of the Roman power in the
west was the development of the Papacy. In the absence of an Emperor in the west, the popes
rapidly gained influence and power and soon built up an ecclesiastical empire that in some
respects took the place of the old empire.” (Myers, General History for Colleges, pp. 348, 316)
emphasis supplied

“St. Thomas . . . says that the Roman Empire has not ceased, but is changed from the temporal
into the spiritual. . . It was, then, the Apostolic Church, which, spreading throughout the nations,
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 129 of 369
already combined together by the power of the heathen empire of Rome, quickened them with a
new life. . . the temporal power in the old heathen empire of Rome, and the spiritual power in the
supernatural kingdom of God met together. . . these two powers were blended and fused
together; they became one authority, the emperor ruling from his throne within the sphere of his
earthly jurisdiction, and the Supreme Pontiff ruling likewise from a throne of a higher sovereignty
over the nations. . . the material power which once reigned in Rome [was] consecrated and
sanctified by the investiture of the Vicar of Jesus Christ with temporal sovereignty over the city
where he dwelt. And now for these twelve hundred years the peace, the perpetuity and
faithfulness of the Christian civilization of Europe, has been owing solely in its principle to this
consecration of the power and authority [Revelation 13:2] of the great empire of Rome, taken
up of old, perpetuated, preserved, as I have said, by the salt which had been sprinkled from
heaven, and continued in the person of the Supreme Pontiff, and in that order of Christian
civilization of which he has been the creator.” (Cardinal Manning, The Temporal Power of the
Vicar of Jesus Christ, pp. 123-128) emphasis supplied

“If we extend our view over the ruins of the Western Empire, such is the spectacle that meets us
on every side. . . . the Pax Romana has ceased; it is universal confusion. But wherever a bishop
holds his court, religion protects all that is left of the ancient order. A new Rome ascends slowly
above the horizon. It is the heir of the religion which it has overthrown; it assumes the outward
splendors of the Caesars. . . . The emperor is no more. . . . But the Pontifex Maximus abides; he is
now the Vicar of Christ, offering the old civilization to the tribes of the north. He converts them to
his creed, and they serve him as their Father and Judge supreme. This is the Papal Monarchy,
which in its power and its decline overshadows the history of Europe for a thousand years.” (W.
F. Barry, The Papal Monarchy, pp. 45, 46) emphasis supplied

“As Rome’s role in pagan history came to an end, she was destined to play another, a sacred one,
in Christian history. . . . Rome’s part in ecclesiastical history had begun. . . Thus a Christian Rome,
destined, like its pagan predecessor on the Palatine, to conquer a large part of the earth, gradually
arose on Vatican Hill. . . . While today the Palatine [the hill of the Roman Emperors’ palaces] is in
ruins, St. Peter’s still draws worshipers from all parts of the world.” (Walter Woodburn Hyde,
Paganism to Christianity in the Roman Empire, pp. 6-7) emphasis supplied

Notice the following amazing declaration by Cardinal Manning:

“Now the abandonment of Rome was the liberation of the pontiffs. Whatsoever claims to
obedience the emperors may have made, and whatsoever compliance the Pontiff may have
yielded, the whole previous relation, anomalous, and annulled again and again by the vices and
outrages of the emperors, was finally dissolved by a higher power. The providence of God
permitted a succession of irruptions, Gothic, Lombard, and Hungarian, to desolate Italy, and to
efface from it every remnant of the empire [remember this fact of history. Later on in this paper
we will see that Protestant futurists rewrite history and deny that the Roman Empire was ever
divided]. The pontiffs found themselves alone, the sole fountains of order, peace, law, and safety.
And from the hour of this providential liberation, when, by a divine intervention, the chains fell
off from the hands of the successor of St. Peter, as once before from his own, no sovereign has
ever reigned in Rome except the Vicar of Jesus Christ.” Henry Edward Manning, The Temporal

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 130 of 369
Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christ, Preface, pp. xxviii, xxix. London: Burns and Lambert, 1862.
Emphasis supplied

This might well be the time to speak of the mysterious ‘restrainer’ that the Apostle Paul refers to
in II Thessalonians 2. The early church Fathers were practically unanimous in the opinion that the
‘restrainer’ was a reference to the Roman Empire in general and the emperors in particular. Paul
indicates that the Church at Thessalonica knew who the restrainer was. And yet Paul speaks in
veiled language. And why would this be? Paul could not speak openly about the Empire which
was governing in his day. If he had publicly stated that the Roman Empire was going to be taken
out of the way, the emperors would have had grounds to accuse Paul of sedition. So Paul had to
be cautious in his comments. If the restrainer was the Holy Spirit, as many futurists believe, then
why was Paul so cautious? It is clear that Paul could not define the ‘restrainer’ openly. It was not
necessary to do so because the Thessalonians knew what he was talking about.

You will notice in the comment by Manning that the fall of the Roman Empire led to the
‘liberation’ of the Roman Pontiff. You will also notice that the fall of the Roman Empire is
described as chains falling off the hands of the successor of St. Peter. The inevitable conclusion
we reach from Manning’s words is that the fall of the empire removed the restraint placed upon
the Bishop of Rome. But now let us turn to the writings of the early church Fathers. Let us start
with Tertullian (160-240 AD):

“‘For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now hinders must hinder, until he be
taken out of the way.’ What obstacle is there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by
being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist upon (its own ruins)? ‘And then shall
be revealed the wicked one.’ ‘On the Resurrection of the Flesh,’ chapter 24; Ante-Nicene Fathers,
vol. III, p. 563 [New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1908]

In yet another comment, Tertullian states:

“The very end of all things threatening dreadful woes is only retarded by the continued existence
of the Roman Empire.” ‘Apology,’ chapter 32; Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. III, p. 43)

Now notice the words of Lactantius (early fourth century):

“The subject itself declares that the fall and ruin of the world will shortly take place; except that
while the city of Rome remains, it appears that nothing of this kind is to be feared. But when that
capital of the world shall have fallen, and shall have begun to be a street, which the Sibyls say
shall come to pass, who can doubt that the end has now arrived to the affairs of men and the
whole world? It is that city, that only, which still sustains all things.” ‘The Divine Institutes,’ book
7, chapter 25; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. VII, p. 220

Let’s listen to Cyril of Jerusalem (318-386 AD):

“But this aforesaid Antichrist is to come when the times of the Roman Empire shall have been
fulfilled, and the end of the world is drawing near. There shall rise up together ten kings of the
Romans, reigning in different parts perhaps, but all about the same time; and after those an
eleventh, the Antichrist, who by his magical craft shall seize upon the Roman power; and of the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 131 of 369
kings who reigned before him, ‘three he shall humble,’ and the remaining seven he shall keep in
subjection to himself.” (‘Catechetical Lectures,’ section 15, on II Thessalonians 2:4; Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. VII, p. 108 [New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1895])

Next we present the testimony of Ambrose (died in 398):

“After the falling or decay of the Roman Empire, Antichrist shall appear.” (Quoted in, Bishop
Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies, p. 463 [London: B. Blake, 1840])
Next in line is Chrysostom (died in 407):

“When the Roman Empire is taken out of the way, then he [the Antichrist] shall come. And
naturally. For as long as the fear of this empire lasts, no one will willingly exalt himself, but when
that is dissolved, he will attack the anarchy, and endeavor to seize upon the government both of
man and of God.” ‘Homily IV on 2 Thessalonians 2:6-9,’ Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. XIII,
p. 389 [New York: Charles Scribner’s and Sons, 1905]

Finally, we will quote from Jerome (died 420):

“He that letteth is taken out of the way, and yet we do not realize that Antichrist is near.” (Letter
to Ageruchia, written about 409 A. D. Letter 123, section 16; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,
vol. VI, p. 236 [New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1912]).

Ellen G. White has some interesting statements regarding the restrainer both in history and in
prophecy:

“The spirit of compromise and conformity [of the early Christian church] was restrained for a time
by the fierce persecutions which the church endured under paganism. But as persecution ceased,
and Christianity entered the courts and palaces of kings, she laid aside the humble simplicity of
Christ and His apostles for the pomp and pride of pagan priests and rulers; and in place of the
requirements of God, she substituted human theories and traditions.” Ellen G. White, The Great
Controversy, p. 49. Emphasis supplied

“Let the restraints now imposed by secular governments be removed and Rome be reinstated in
her former power, and there would speedily be a revival of her tyranny and persecution.” Ellen G.
White, The Great Controversy, p. 564. Emphasis supplied

“The vast empire of Rome crumbled to pieces, and from its ruins rose that mighty power, the
Roman Catholic Church. This church boasts of her infallibility and her hereditary religion.”
(Manuscript Releases, Volume 1, p. 50)

Characteristic #2: The Roman Catholic Church did arise among the ten kingdoms into which the
Roman Empire was divided. Notice the following two quotations:

“Even the Romanists themselves admit that the Roman Empire was, by means of the incursions
of the northern nations, dismembered into ten kingdoms (Calmet on Revelation 13:1; and he
refers likewise to Berangaud, Bossuet, and DuPin. See Newton, p. 209); and Machiavelli (‘History

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 132 of 369
of Florence,’ 1.i) with no design of furnishing an illustration of this prophecy, and probably with
no recollection of it, has mentioned these names: 1. The Ostrogoths in Moesia; 2. The Visigoths
in Pannonia; 3. The Sueves and Alans in Gascoign and Spain; 4. The Vandals in Africa; 5. The
Franks in France; 6. The Burgundians in Burgundy; 7. The Heruli and Turingi in Italy; 8. The Saxons
and Angles in Britain; 9. The Huns in Hungary; 10. The Lombards at first upon the Danube,
afterwards in Italy.”(Albert Barnes, Notes on the Book of Daniel, p. 322)

“Antichrist, then (as the Fathers delight to call him), or the little horn, is to be sought among the
ten kingdoms of the Western Roman Empire. I say of the western Roman Empire, because that
was properly the body of the fourth beast; Greece, and the countries which lay eastward of Italy
belonged to the third beast; for the former beasts were still subsisting, though their dominion was
taken away. ‘As concerning the rest of the beasts,’ saith Daniel, ‘they had their dominion taken
away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.’ Daniel 7:12. ‘And therefore,’ as Sir
Isaac Newton rightly infers, ‘all four beasts are still alive, though the dominion of the three first
be taken away.’

The nations of Chaldea and Assyria are still the first beast. Those of Media and Persia are still the
second beast. Those of Macedon, Greece and Thrace, Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt, are still the
third. And those of Europe, on this side of Greece, are still the fourth. Seeing therefore the body
of the third beast is confined to the nations on this side the river Euphrates, and the body of the
fourth beast is confined to the nations on this side of Greece; we are to look for all the four heads
of the third beast among the nations on this side the river Euphrates; and for all the eleven horns
of the fourth beast, among the nations on this side of Greece.” (Thomas Newton, Dissertations
on the Prophecies, pp. 239, 240) emphasis supplied

Characteristic #3:

The Roman Catholic Papacy did arise to supremacy after the year 476 A. D. The Papal power
could not exercise absolute sovereignty until the ten kingdoms were subjected to its control.
When Odoacer, king of the Heruli, deposed Romulus Augustulus in 476 A. D. the fragmentation
of the Roman Empire was complete. Yet even though the ten divisions of the Roman Empire were
complete by 476 A. D., there were three who were rebellious and refused to submit to the Bishop
of Rome (the Vandals, the Heruli and the Ostrogoths). These had to be removed in order for the
papacy to exercise absolute control.
Characteristic #4:
The little horn did uproot three of the ten kingdoms. The story goes like this: Seven of the ten
Barbarian kingdoms were converted to Christianity and submitted to the authority of the Bishop
of Rome. However, three of the kingdoms converted to Christianity but embraced the heretical
teachings of Arius. Arius (who was presbyter in Alexandria around the year 320 A. D.) taught that
‘Christ was created out of nothing as the first and greatest of all creatures’ (Loraine Boettner,
Baker’s Dictionary of Theology, pp. 64-65).

The teachings of Arius were condemned in two great church councils, Nicaea (325 AD) and
Constantinople (381 AD). These three Arian kingdoms were a threat to the supremacy of the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 133 of 369
Bishop of Rome [later called the Pope]. To make a long story short, these three kingdoms
eventually were uprooted by the imperial power acting under the influence of the Bishop of
Rome. The Ostrogoths (originally from Yugoslavia), by order of the emperor, dealt the heretical
Heruli a devastating defeat in 493.

It happened like this: The Pope requested the emperor to do something about the unorthodox
Heruli. In response, the emperor sent Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths to do battle with
Odoacer, king of the Heruli. Odoacer was slain by Theodoric and the Heruli disappeared from
history. Then the Vandals were crushed (in 534 AD) by Belisarius, general of emperor Justinian’s
armies.

But there was one remaining horn which needed to be uprooted, and it was the most formidable
of all: The Ostrogoths. After the Ostrogoths conquered the Heruli, they became extremely
powerful. They were also Arians, so the Bishop of Rome [the Pope] implored Justinian to uproot
the Ostrogoths. Justinian, in turn, implored the Franks to help him in his holy enterprise:

“When Justinian first meditated the conquest of Italy, he sent ambassadors to the kings of the
Franks, and adjured them, by the common ties of alliance and religion, to join in the holy
enterprise against the Arians.” Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire, volume 4 [chapter 41, paragraph 32] (New York: Harper & Brothers), p. 175 emphasis
supplied

There were several battles between Belisarius and the Ostrogoths. The decisive battle, however,
was in February (remember the month because we will come back to it later) of the year 538.
The armies of Justinian, as well as the ravages of disease, decimated the armies of the Ostrogoths,
they were expelled from Rome and in short order, disappeared from the historical scene in
Europe. The third horn had been uprooted once and for all!

It is of great significance that in 533 AD Justinian proclaimed a decree which recognized the
Pope’s headship over all the churches of east and west. This decree was actually a letter written
by Justinian to Pope John. The letter was included in The Code of Justinian which is a collection
of Justinian’s laws. It must be remembered that this letter had the force of law. In effect, the
Code of Justinian was the standard law of all Europe for over one thousand years until it was
replaced in the late 1700's by the Code of Napoleon. Part of Justinian’s decree reads as follows:

“Therefore, we have exerted ourselves to unite all the priests of the East and subject them to the
See of Your Holiness, and hence the questions which have at present arisen, although they are
manifest and free from doubt, and, according to the doctrine of Your Apostolic See, are constantly
firmly observed and preached by all priests. . . because you are the head of all the Holy Churches,
for We shall exert Ourselves in every way (as has already been stated), to increase the honor and
authority of your See. . .” (S. P. Scott, The Civil Law, vol. 12, pp. 11-13)

The significance of this decree is that the Roman Emperor was legitimizing the spiritual authority
of the Pope. The state was using its clout to proclaim that only the Pope was the authentic
spokesman for orthodox Christianity. Though this decree was given in 533 AD, it was not fully
implemented until the rebel Ostrogoths were devastated in 538 AD.
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 134 of 369
On the devastating defeat of the Ostrogoths in 538 A. D., Thomas Hodgkin remarks:

“Some of them [the retreating Goths] must have suspected the melancholy truth that they had
dug one grave deeper and wider than all, the grave of the Gothic monarchy in Italy.” (Thomas
Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 5, chap. 9, last par. [vol. 4, p. 285]).

Most historians agree that the decimation of the Ostrogoths in Italy marked the beginning of the
middle Ages. Notice the comment by George Finlay:

“With the conquest of Rome by Belisarius, the history of the ancient city may be considered as
terminating; and with his defense against Witiges [538 AD], commences the history of the Middle
Ages.” (George Finlay, Greece Under the Romans, p. 295)

It is important to remember also that historians mark 538 AD as the transition between old
Imperial Rome and the Rome of the Middle Ages. Notice the words of C. F. Young:

“It was the last time [when Belisarius entered in 536] that Imperial Rome—the old imperial Rome
of Italy as distinguished from the new imperial Rome by the Bosporus, the Rome created by
Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Vespasian, Domitian, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus, Severus, and
Caracalla—was to be seen by mankind. . . Rome when it was entered by Belisarius was the Rome
that mankind had known for centuries. . . But this Rome was to be seen no more. When eighteen
years later the Gothic war was ended, a battered ruin was all that remained; classical Rome had
passed away forever, to be succeeded after a time by the squalid and miserable city which is the
Rome of the middle Ages.” (C. F. Young, East and West Through Fifteen Centuries, Vol. II, p. 222)

The Ostrogoths did not disappear in 538 AD, but the decisive battle had been won, the
handwriting was on the wall. In 540 AD Witiges (king of the Ostrogoths) was dealt a further blow
by Belisarius at Ravenna. And in 550 AD what was left of the Ostrogoths was totally wiped out
and the Ostrogoths were swept into the dust heap of history. It is of great significance that today
no trace can be found of the Heruli anywhere in Europe. There is no memory of the Vandals in
North Africa. And all that remains of the Ostrogoths is King Theodoric’s Mausoleum (built in the
early 6th century) in Ravenna. Theodoric was buried in this mausoleum in 526 AD but today his
body is gone. When Belisarius conquered Ravenna in 540 AD, Theodoric’s body was removed
from the casket and discarded. So it is literally true that the three horns were uprooted!!
Characteristic #5:

The Roman Catholic Papacy does claim to have the right and authority to exercise the
prerogatives and power of God. The Bible is clear that the Antichrist will sit in the Temple of God,
‘showing himself that he is God (II Thessalonians 2:3-4). Notice the following evidence which
incriminates the Roman Catholic Papacy:

First, Roman Catholic Church historians and theologians have made some rather audacious
statements regarding the dignity and power of the Pope. Let’s notice a few of them:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 135 of 369
In an oration offered to the Pope in the fourth session of the Fifth Lateran Council (1512)
Christopher Marcellus stated:

“For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the
husbandman; finally, thou art another God on earth.” (Labbe and Cossart, History of the
Councils, Vol. XIV, col. 109) emphasis supplied

The Catechism of the Council of Trent states the following:

“Bishops and priests, being, as they are, God’s interpreters and ambassadors, empowered in His
name to teach mankind the divine law and the rules of conduct, and holding, as they do, His place
on earth, it is evident that no nobler function than theirs can be imagined. Justly, therefore, are
they called not only Angels, but even gods, because of the fact that they exercise in our midst the
power and prerogatives of the immortal God.” (John A. McHugh and Charles J. Callan, Catechism
of the Council of Trent for Parish Priests, p. 318) emphasis supplied

Notice the following words of Cardinal Robert Bellarmine:

“All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that he
is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” (Robert Bellarmine,
Disputationes de Controversiis, Tom. 2, ‘Controversia Prima’, Book 2 (‘De Conciliorum
Auctoritate’ [On the Authority of Councils]), chap. 17 (1628 ed., Vol. 1, p. 266), translated

The New York Catechism states:

“The pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth. . . By divine right the pope has supreme and
full power in faith and morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true Vicar of
Christ, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible
ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth,
the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by
no one, God himself on earth.” (Quoted in Lorraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism, p. 127)
emphasis supplied

Notice the following words in the journal, La Civilta Cattolica,

“The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land. . . . . He is the vice-regent of Christ, who is
not only a Priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords.” (La Civilta Cattolica, March 18,
1871, quoted in Leonard Woolsey Bacon, An Inside View of the Vatican Council (American Tract
Society ed.), p. 229, n. emphasis supplied

Pope Gregory IX adds his testimony:

“For not man, but God separates those whom the Roman Pontiff (who exercises the functions,
not of mere man, but of the true God), having weighed the necessity or benefit of the churches,
dissolves, not by human but rather by divine authority.” (The Decretals of Gregory IX, Book l,
title 7, chap. 3, in Corpus Juris Canonici (1555-56 ed.), Volume 2, col. 203, translated) emphasis
supplied

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 136 of 369
John XXIII at his inauguration address said:

“Into this fold of Jesus Christ no one can enter if not under the guidance of the Sovereign Pontiff;
and men can securely reach salvation only when they are united with him, since the Roman
Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and represents His person on this earth.” Quoted in Lorraine
Boettner, Roman Catholicism, p. 408

Pope Leo XIII stated in an Encyclical Letter dated June 20, 1894:

“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” (The Great Encyclical Letters of Leo XIII, p.
304)

Notice the following statement by a Roman Catholic scholar:

“The priest is the man of God, the minister of God, the portion of God, the man called of God,
consecrated to God, wholly occupied with the interests of God; he that despiseth him despiseth
God; he that hears him hears God: he remits sins as God, and that which he calls his body at the
altar is adored as God by himself and by the congregation. . .” (A. Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as
Defined by the Council of Trent, pp. 543, 544)

Another Roman Catholic scholar states:

“The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, or the visible head of the church on earth. The claims of the Pope
are the same as the claims of Christ. Christ wanted all souls saved. So does the Pope. Christ can
forgive all sin. So can the Pope. The Pope is the only man who claims the vicarage of Christ. His
claim is not seriously opposed, and this establishes his authority.

The powers given the Pope by Christ were given him not as a mere man, but as the representative
of Christ. The Pope is more than the representative of Christ, for he is the fruit of his divinity and
of the divine institution of the church.” (Extract of a sermon by Rev. Jeremiah Prendegast, S. J.,
preached in the Church of St. John the Baptist, Syracuse, New York, on Wednesday evening, March
13, 1912, as reported in the Syracuse Post Standard, March 14, 1912) emphasis supplied.

The following words, in a recognized Roman Catholic encyclopedia, illustrate the blasphemous
claims of the Papacy:

“The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God, and
the vicar of God. The Pope is of such lofty and supreme dignity that, properly speaking, he has
not been established in any rank of dignity, but rather has been placed upon the very summit of
all ranks of dignities. The Pope is called most holy because he is rightfully presumed to be such.
Nor can emperors and kings be called most holy; for although in civil laws the term ‘most sacred’
seems sometimes to have been usurped by emperors, yet never that of ‘most holy.’ The Pope
alone is deservedly called by the name ‘most holy’, because he alone is the Vicar of Christ, who is
the fountain and source and fullness of all holiness.

The Pope by reason of the excellence of his supreme dignity is called bishop of bishops. He is also
called ordinary of ordinaries. He is likewise bishop of the universal church. He is likewise the divine

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 137 of 369
monarch and supreme emperor, and king of kings. Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown,
as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions.

“Moreover the superiority and the power of the Roman Pontiff by no means pertain only to the
heavenly things, to the earthly things, and to the things under the earth, but are even over angels,
than whom he is greater. So that if it were possible that the angels might err in the faith, or might
think contrary to the faith, they could be judged and excommunicated by the Pope. For he is of
so great dignity and power that he forms one and the same tribunal with Christ. So that whatever
the Pope does, seems to proceed from the mouth of God, as according to most doctors, etc.

The Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief king of kings,
having plenitude of power, to whom has been entrusted by the omnipotent God direction not only
of the earthly but also of the heavenly kingdom.

“The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine
laws. [In proof of this last proposition various quotations are made, among them these:] The Pope
can modify divine law, since his power is not of man but of God, and he acts as vice-regent of
God upon earth with most ample power of binding and loosing his sheep. Whatever the Lord God
himself, and the Redeemer, is said to do, that his vicar does, provided that he does nothing
contrary to the faith.” (Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis,
Theologica nec non Ascetica, Polemica, Rubricistica, Historica, article, ‘Papa’) This encyclopedia
is not some offshoot production. The Catholic Encyclopedia, volume VI, p. 48 in its article,
‘Ferraris’ lauds the virtues of this encyclopedia with the following glowing words: It is ‘a veritable
encyclopedia of religious knowledge’ and ‘a precious mine of information.’

Once again, Pope Leo XIII stated:

“But the supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires,
together with a perfect accord in the one faith, complete submission and obedience of will to the
Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself.” (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter, ‘On the
Chief Duties of Christians as Citizens’, dated January 10, 1890, trans. in The Great Encyclical
Letters of Pope Leo XIII, p. 193 emphasis supplied.

Pope Nicholas I, who ruled from 858 to 867 A. D. pronounced the following awesome words:

“It is evident that the popes can neither be bound nor unbound by any earthly power, nor even by
that of the apostle [Peter], if he should return upon the earth; since Constantine the Great has
recognized that the pontiffs held the place of God upon earth, divinity not being able to be
judged by any living man. We are, then, infallible, and whatever may be our acts, we are not
accountable for them but to ourselves.” (Cormenin, History of the Popes, p. 243, as cited in R. W.
Thompson, The Papacy and the Civil Power, p. 248) emphasis supplied

Many other quotations could be added to prove that the Papacy claims to have the powers and
prerogatives of God.

Not only do we have statements from Roman Catholic sources to the effect that the Papacy has
the power of God, but the Pope also claims the right to be called ‘Holy Father’. Jesus warned the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 138 of 369
Jewish leaders of His day: ‘And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father
which is in heaven’ (Matthew 23:9). In the light of this clear statement of Jesus, How can the
Pope demand that he be called ‘Holy Father’? The name, Pope comes from the Italian, ‘Papa’
which is an abbreviation of pater patruum which means ‘father of fathers’ or ‘principal father’
(See, Malachi Martin, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, p. 19).

Second, the Pope allows people to approach him and bow before him and kiss his ring. In fact,
Gregory VII, in his famous Dictatus Papae (Dictates of Hildebrand), article #9 states: ‘That all
princes should kiss his [the Pope’s] feet only.’ (Cesare Baronius, Annales, year 1076, sections 31-
33, volume 17 (1869 ed.), pp. 405, 406, translated)

Third, Acts 10:25-26 explains that Peter refused to allow Cornelius to bow before him. And
supposedly, Peter was the first Pope! Even the angel Gabriel refused to allow John the Apostle
to bow before him (see Revelation 19:10; 22:8-9). Jesus said to Satan on the Mount of
Temptation, ‘Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve’. How unlike
Jesus is the Pope. Jesus washed the feet of His disciples but the Pope has encouraged people to
bow before him and kiss his feet!!

Fourth, the Papacy claims to possess the power to forgive sins. According to the Bible, only God
can forgive sins (see Mark 2:7). If only God can forgive sins and the Pope claims to have power to
forgive them, then the Pope must claim to be God! Not only does the Papacy claim that the Pope
can forgive sins, but it also claims that its priesthood can forgive them. St. Alphonsus de Liguori
wrote a book titled, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva. Liguori lived in the mid 1700's.
What makes his book especially significant is that it is a compendium of the Roman Catholic
‘wisdom’ of the previous 1500 years. Thus it presents with clarity, the official position of the
Roman Catholic Church on the subject of the power and duties of the priesthood.

Before we look at several blasphemous statements from this book, it is important to understand
the Roman Catholic view of the Mass. In their view,

 The priest has the power to change or transubstantiate the bread into the real flesh of
Jesus and the wine into His real blood.
 Christ is contained in his totality (known as ‘ubiquity’) in each host that is distributed by
the priest.
 Because Christ is totally present in each host, the host is worshiped by the priest and the
faithful.
 Obviously, for these concepts to be true, the priest would have to exercise the powers of
Almighty God. And this is just what the Roman Catholic Church believes.

Let’s listen to the words of St. Alphonsus de Liguori:

“With regard to the power of the priests over the real body of Jesus Christ, it is of faith that when
they pronounce the words of consecration the Incarnate Word has obliged himself to obey and to

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 139 of 369
come into their hands under the sacramental species. We are struck with wonder when we hear
that God obeyed the voice of Josue—the Lord obeying the voice of man—and made the sun stand
when he said move not, O sun, towards Gabaon. . . and the sun stood still.

But our wonder should be far greater when we find that in obedience to the words of his priests—
HOC EST CORPUS MEUM—GOD himself descends on the altar, that he comes wherever they call
him, and as often as they call him, and places himself in their hands, even though they should be
his enemies. And after having come, he remains, entirely at their disposal; they move him as they
please, from one place to another; they may, if they wish, shut him up in the tabernacle, or expose
him on the altar, or carry him outside the church; they may, if they choose, eat his flesh, and give
him for the food of others.” St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva,
pp. 26-27

“With regard to the mystic body of Christ, that is, all the faithful, the priest has the power of the
keys, or the power of delivering sinners from hell, of making them worthy of paradise, and of
changing them from the slaves of Satan into the children of God. And God himself is obliged to
abide by the judgment of his priests, and either not to pardon or to pardon, according as they
refuse or give absolution provided the penitent is capable of it. ‘Such is,’ says St. Maximus of Turin,
‘this judiciary power ascribed to Peter that its decision carries with it the decision of God.’ ‘The
sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribes to it,’ writes St. Peter Damian.” St. Alphonsus
de Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva, pp. 27-28

“Were the Redeemer to descend into a church, and sit in a confessional to administer the
sacrament of penance, and a priest to sit in another confessional, Jesus would say over each
penitent, ‘Ego te absolvo,’ the priest would likewise say over each of his penitents, ‘Ego te
absolvo,’ and the penitents of each would be equally absolved.” St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity
and Duties of the Priest or Selva, p. 28

“Thus the priest may, in a certain manner, be called the creator of his Creator, since by saying
the words of consecration, he creates, as it were, Jesus in the sacrament, by giving him a
sacramental existence, and produces him as a victim to be offered to the eternal Father. As in
creating the world it was sufficient for God to have said, Let it be made, and it was created—He
spoke, and they were made—so it is sufficient for the priest to say, ‘Hoc est corpus meum,’ and
behold the bread is no longer bread, but the body of Jesus Christ. ‘The power of the priest,’ says
St. Bernardine of Sienna, ‘is the power of the divine person; for the transubstantiation of the bread
requires as much power as the creation of the world.’” St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity and
Duties of the Priest or Selva, pp. 33-34 emphasis supplied

“When he ascended into heaven, Jesus Christ left his priests after him to hold on earth his place
of mediator between God and men, particularly on the altar. . . The Priest holds the place of the
Savior himself, when, by saying ‘Ego te absolvo,’ he absolves from sin.” St. Alphonsus de Liguori,
Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva, p. 34

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 140 of 369
Notice also the blasphemous words of the Baltimore Catechism:

“The priest does not have to ask God to forgive your sins. The priest himself has the power to do
so in Christ’s name. Your sins are forgiven by the priest the same as if you knelt before Jesus Christ
and told them to Christ Himself.” Quoted in Lorraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism, p. 197

The Council of Trent described the power of priest with the following words:

“The priest is the man of God, the minister of God. . . He that despiseth the priest despiseth God;
he that hears him hears God. The priest remits sins as God and that which he calls his body at the
altar is adored as God by himself and by the congregation. . . It is clear that their function is such
that none greater can be conceived. Wherefore they are justly called not only angels, but also
God, holding as they do among us the power and authority of the immortal God” A. Nampon,
Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, pp. 543,544

Fifth, the Roman Catholic Papacy claims to have changed the law of God. Not even God can
change the law He wrote with His own finger (see, Exodus 31:18). It is as eternal as He is. This
means that the Papacy not only claims powers that are equal to God’s but actually claims a power
which is greater than God’s. This is blasphemy in its most odious form. Notice the following
words from the Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. XII, art. ‘Pope,’ p. 265:

“Peter and his successors have power to impose laws both preceptive and prohibitive, power
likewise to grant dispensation from these laws, and, when, needful, to annul them. It is theirs to
judge offenses against the laws, to impose and to remit penalties. This judicial authority will even
include the power to forgive sin. For sin is a breach of the laws of the supernatural kingdom, and
falls under the cognizance of its constituted judges.”

In characteristic # 8 below, we will show how the Papacy claims to have changed God’s law.
Roman Catholic catechisms ignore the second commandment and split the tenth commandment
into two. They also claim to have changed the fourth commandment.

Sixth, the Papacy claims that it has infallibility in faith and morals. The Bible teaches clearly that
only God is infallible and does not change (James 1:17; Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8)). If the Pope,
speaking ex-cathedra, claims to be infallible, then he must also be claiming to be God!! Notice
the following evidence:

Gregory VII, in his famous Dictatus Papae, makes twenty seven propositions among which is:
‘That the Roman Church never erred, nor will it, according to the Scriptures, ever err.’ (Cesare
Baronius, Annales, year 1076, sections. 31-33, volume 17 (1869 ed.), pp. 405, 406, translated)

The Roman Catholic Papacy has put itself on the record on this point by proclaiming, in 1870, the
famous Dogma of Papal Infallibility. The events surrounding this event are described by Norskov
Olsen:

“‘Viva Pio Nono Papa infallible!’ These words echoed and re-echoed in the basilica of St. Peter in
Rome on the eventful July 18, 1870 when the great crowd, having heard the message of papal

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 141 of 369
infallibility, jubilantly expressed their applause. In the midst of one of the fiercest storms ever
known to break across the city, accompanied by thunder and lightning, while rain poured in
through the broken glass of the roof close to the spot where the Pope was standing, Pius IX read
in the darkness, by the aid of a candle, the momentous affirmation of his own infallibility.

“The fierce storm and dense darkness, the thunder and lightning that accompanied the reading
of this document, caused adherents of the papacy to compare the event to the lawgiving at Mount
Sinai; on the other hand, opponents saw in the wrath of the elements a sign of God’s anger. By
both friend and critic the declaration of papal absolutism was considered to be the most
momentous event in the long history of the papacy.

“On that day the document entitled Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith was decreed. It
contains three fundamental concepts which were made into dogma: the supremacy, the universal
jurisdiction, and the infallibility of the pope.” V. Norskov Olsen, Papal Supremacy and American
Democracy, p. 2
The key portion of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith stated the following:

“We teach and define that it is a dogma divinely revealed: that the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks
ex cathedra, that is, when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue
of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by
the universal Church, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of
that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed for
defining doctrine regarding faith or morals; and that therefore such definitions of the Roman
Pontiff are irreformable of themselves, and not from the consent of the Church. But if any one—
which may God avert—presume to contradict this, our definition: let him be anathema.” Philip
Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, vol. 2, chapter 4, pp. 270-271

The Roman Catholic theologian, Fritz Leist, comments on this dogma:

“The infallibility of the pope is the infallibility of Jesus Christ Himself. . . whenever the pope thinks,
it is God Himself, who is thinking in him.” Fritz Leist, Der Gefangene des Vatikanus, p. 344.
Quoted in Symposium on Revelation, pp. 340-341 emphasis supplied

The proclamation of this Papal Dogma was the most controversial in the history of the Roman
Catholic Church. A significant number of the clergy who attended the Vatican Council I, were
ardently opposed to this dogma and yet in spite of protests, it was passed. If you would like to
read more about how this controversial dogma was passed, despite the opposition, read the
opening pages of V. Norskov Olsen’s book, Papal Supremacy and American Democracy.

The renowned Bible commentator, Adam Clarke, remarks:

“They have assumed infallibility, which belongs only to God. They profess to forgive sins, which
belongs only to God. They profess to open and shut heaven, which belongs only to God. They
profess to be higher than all the kings of the earth, which belongs only to God. And they go beyond
God in pretending to loose whole nations from their oath of allegiance to their kings, when such

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 142 of 369
kings do not please them. And they go against God, when they give indulgences for sin. This is the
worst of all blasphemies.” Adam Clarke, Commentary, on Daniel 7:25

This dogma has created numerous problems for the Papacy in recent years. For example, Hans
Kung, a leading theologian of the Catholic Church was defrocked from his chair at the University
of Tubingen for writing a book titled Infallible? An Inquiry. In this book, Kung shows that Pope
Paul VI’s encyclical, Humane Vitae, is not only based of bad history but also on bad science. This
book provides a plethora of examples which show that popes have made gargantuan mistakes
even when they speak ex-cathedra on faith and morals. So much for the Dogma of Papal
Infallibility!!

Seventh, according to the Bible, it is the prerogative of God alone to place kings on the throne
and to depose them (Daniel 2:21) and yet the Papacy, throughout its history has boastfully
claimed the right to install kings and depose them. The examples are numerous (under point #
10 we will furnish several of these) but for now, let us examine statements by Popes and
theologians to this effect:

In the famous Dictatus Papae of Pope Gregory VII, article 12 states: “That it is lawful for him [the
Pope] to depose emperors.” Article 27 reads: “That he [the Pope] can absolve subjects from their
allegiance to unrighteous rulers.”

In the second sentence of excommunication which Gregory VII passed upon Henry the Fourth are
these words:

“Come now, I beseech you, O most holy and blessed fathers and princes, Peter and Paul, that all
the world may understand and know that if ye are able to bind and to loose in heaven, ye are
likewise able on earth, according to the merits of each man, to give and to take away empires,
kingdoms, princedoms, marquisates, duchies, countships, and the possessions of all men. For if ye
judge spiritual things, what must we believe to be your power over worldly things? And if ye judge
the angels who rule over all the proud princes, what can ye do to their slaves?” James Bryce, The
Holy Roman Empire, p. 161.

The arrogance of the Papacy over the secular power is illustrated in the famous Decree of Gratian.
Even though this Decree is a forgery, it does show the boastful claims of the papacy:

“It is shown with sufficient clearness that by the secular power the Pope cannot in any way be
bound or loosed, who it is certain was called God by the pious leader Constantine, and it is clear
that God cannot be judged by man.” Decree of Gratian, part 1, div. 96, chap. 7

Notice the words of the papal bull of Pius V deposing Queen Elizabeth of England in 1570:

“He that reigneth on high, to whom all power in heaven and earth is given, has with all fullness
of power delivered the rule of the one holy catholic and apostolic church, outside of which there
is no salvation, to one sole [ruler] upon earth, to wit, Peter, the prince of the apostles, and to the
Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter. Him alone he hath set as prince over all nations and all
kingdoms, to pull up, to destroy, to overthrow, and to break down, to plant, and to build, that he

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 143 of 369
may keep the people faithful, bound with the bond of mutual love, and in the unity of the Spirit,
and present them unhurt and safe to his Savior.”

Pope Pius, in articles 4 and 5 of this Bull, states the following:

“Article 4: Moreover she herself is deprived of her pretended right to the aforesaid kingdom, and
also of all dominion, dignity and privilege whatsoever. Article 5: And so we absolve the nobles,
subjects, and peoples of the said kingdom, and all others who have taken any oath to her, from
the obligation of their oath and besides from all duty of dominion, fidelity and obedience: and we
deprive the said Elizabeth of her pretended right to the kingdom and of all other things as is
aforesaid: and we charge and order all and every the nobles, subjects, and peoples, and others
aforesaid, not to venture to obey her monitions, commands, and laws. And we attach the like
sentence of anathema to those who shall act otherwise. . . Given at St. Peter’s in Rome on the 25th
of February of 1570, in the fifth year of our pontificate” Charles Stuteville, Our Brief Against
Rome, p. 268

Eight, the Bible makes it clear that God the Father has given Jesus Christ the right to judge
because He is the Son of Man (John 5:22, 27). In fact, the Father has given Jesus ALL JUDGMENT!!
But the Papacy claims that it has been given the right to serve as judge of mankind. In this way,
the Papacy, once again, claims to possess the right to exercise the role which belongs to God
alone. Notice the following evidence:

In Gregory VII’s Dictatus Papae, article 18 reads:

“That his [the Pope’s] sentence is not to be reviewed by any one; while he alone can review the
decisions of all others.”

Article 19 states:

“That he [the Pope] can be judged by no one”

Augustinus de Ancona, in a document preserved in the British Museum, states the following:

“Therefore the decision of the Pope and the decision of God constitute one [i. e., the same]
decision, just as the opinion of the Pope and of his disciple are the same. Since, therefore, an
appeal is always taken from an inferior judge to a superior, as no one is greater than himself, so
no appeal holds when made from the Pope to God, because there is one consistory of the Pope
himself and of God himself, of which consistory the Pope himself is the key-bearer and the
doorkeeper. Therefore no one can appeal from the Pope to God, as no one can enter into the
consistory of God without the mediation of the Pope, who is the key-bearer and the doorkeeper
of the consistory of eternal life; and as no one can appeal to himself, so no one can appeal from
the Pope to God, because there is one decision and one court [curia] of God and the Pope.” (From
the writings of Augustinus de Ancona (R. C.), printed without title page or pagination,
commencing, ‘incipit summa Catholici doctoris Augustini de Ancona potestate ecclesiastica’,
Questio VI, ‘De Papalis Sententiae Appellatione’ (On an Appeal from a Decision of the Pope).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 144 of 369
We are also reminded of the words of Lucius Ferraris:

“So that if it were possible that the angels might err in the faith, or might think contrary to the
faith, they could be judged and excommunicated by the Pope. For he is of so great dignity and
power that he forms one and the same tribunal with Christ.” Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca,
article, ‘Papa’, II, vol. 6, pp. 26-29

Characteristic #6:

The Roman Catholic Church has been an ardent persecutor of dissenters throughout its history.
It has a history stained in blood. The record is there for everyone who wishes to examine it. We
will first make a few remarks about the Biblical view of freedom of conscience and then we will
trace the historical record of how Roman Catholicism has trampled on this fundamental freedom.

Roman Catholic authors frequently employ two passages to defend the view that it has a right to
use the sword to preserve the integrity of the faith: Matthew 10:34-37 and Matthew 16:16-18.
In the first passage Jesus says He has not ‘come to bring peace but a sword’. Many Catholic
authors employ this to justify their church’s use of the sword to punish dissenters. But a careful
reading of this text shows that the sword is not used by believers against unbelievers but rather
by unbelievers against believers. The keys in the second passage are interpreted as the right to
exercise spiritual power and temporal power. In other words, the church not only has the right
to rule in spiritual matters but also in civil affairs. According to Roman Catholic theology, this
gives the church the right to employ the civil power to punish those who dissent from its theology
and practice.

A close examination of the Bible indicates that Jesus intended the civil and religious powers to be
separate. God is not a God of coercion but of persuasion. God does not violate the conscience of
man. This means that God gives every man the right to believe according to the dictates of his
own conscience when matters of religion are in play. In this realm, God even gives man the right
to be wrong!! A few biblical texts will suffice to prove the above view:

Matthew 22:21 unequivocally states that we are to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and
unto God that which belongs to God. A close examination of the text in the light of the totality of
Scripture indicates that the realm of Caesar is in civil matters (the second table of the Ten
Commandments) and the realm of God is in spiritual matters (the first table of the Ten
Commandments).

When Jesus was dragged before Pilate He was asked if He was a king. Jesus assured Pilate that
His kingdom was not of this world (John 19:36). He even told Pilate that if His kingdom were of
this world, His disciples would fight to deliver Him from the Jews. This clearly shows that Jesus
had no intention of establishing an earthly kingdom by employing force. The kingdom could only
be established by implanting the Holy Spirit in the heart of His disciples.

It is a sobering fact that the trial and crucifixion of Jesus followed the same pattern as was later
used by the Holy Office of the Inquisition. Notice the following points: 1) Jesus was arrested
because He refused to accept the traditions and authority of the apostate church of His day, 2)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 145 of 369
Jesus was taken before a religious tribunal and interrogated 3) Jesus was then delivered to the
secular power of Rome to be killed.

This is the precise method which was used by the Inquisition. Those who did not agree with the
hierarchy of the church and refused to accept tradition above Scripture were brought before the
inquisitor and grilled mercilessly. Then they were delivered to the civil power to be punished
(later in this study we will review some of the specific methods which were used by the
Inquisition). It is significant that Satan offered Jesus the kingdoms of this world and Jesus refused
them. But Satan offered the Bishop of Rome these same kingdoms and he accepted them. This
makes the Bishop of Rome the vice-regent of Satan. If Jesus had accepted, he would have become
the vice-regent of Satan.

When the mob came to arrest Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, Peter took out a sword and
tried to defend the cause of Jesus by force. The words of Jesus are very telling: ‘Put up again thy
sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword’ (Matthew 26:51-
52).

In Luke 9:51-56 we are told the story of James and John who wanted to incinerate those who
lived in certain Samaritan villages because they refused to accept Jesus. The words of Jesus to
the ‘sons of thunder’ are very telling: ‘Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of, for the Son
of Man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.’ Clearly Jesus refused to employ
force to advance the cause of His kingdom.
The prophecies of Daniel and Revelation clearly reveal that God’s people are always the
persecuted not the persecutors. During the 1260 years the true church was in exile in the desert
(see Revelation 12:6, 14). During this period the true church was persecuted, it did not
persecute. But history reveals, indelibly, that the Roman Catholic Church during this period was
the persecutor. This makes it crystal clear that the Roman Catholic system was performing the
work of the little horn in making war against and wearing out the saints of the Most High (Daniel
7:21, 25)

What is remarkable is that Daniel 7:21 states that this apostate power would actually prevail
against the saints during this period and this is exactly what happened!! We have already seen in
another context that the mixture of iron and clay in the feet of the image of Daniel 2 represents
the mixture of church and state after the division of the Roman Empire. Revelation 17 reveals a
time when the church (the harlot) and the state (the kings of the earth) will once again form an
alliance to persecute dissenters.

Let’s examine the Roman Catholic view of persecution. It was St. Augustine who laid the
foundation for the persecutions of the middle ages. In his own words:

“Originally my opinion was that no one should be coerced into the unity of Christ that we must
act only by words, fight only by arguments, and prevail by force of reason, lest we should have
those whom we knew as avowed heretics feigning themselves to be Catholics. But this opinion of
mine was overcome not by the words of those who controverted it, but by the conclusive
instances to which they could point. For, in the first place, there was set over against my opinion

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 146 of 369
my own town [Hippo], which, although it was once wholly on the side of Donatus [a heretic who
was leader of a group known as the Donatists], was brought over to the Catholic unity by fear of
the imperial edicts.” St. Augustine, Letter 93 (to Vincentius), chapter 5, section 17, translated in
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, first series, volume I, p. 388 emphasis supplied

In short, Augustine’s monumental work The City of God, presented a radically unbiblical view of
the kingdom. For him, the kingdom of God would be established when the church conquered the
whole world for Christ. In other words, the kingdom would be established from within history
rather than from without. Concerning this concept, Merrill C. Tenney remarks:

“In his famous work, The City of God, he [Augustine] advanced the doctrine that the city or
commonwealth of the world was doomed to perish, whereas the ‘city of God,’ the church, was
continuing and taking its place. He taught that the ‘city of God’ was identical with the church and
that as the latter grew in power and influence it would gradually bring all men under its sway and
would introduce the reign of righteousness.

“This doctrine of Augustine became the basis for the temporal claims of the Roman church. If the
kingdom was to grow irresistibly until it dominated the earth, and if the visible church was
identical with the kingdom, then the visible church could rightfully assume political power, and
could make its conquests by force.” Merrill C. Tenney, Interpreting Revelation (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Eerdman’s, 1957), pp. 147, 148, emphasis supplied

But Daniel 2 makes it clear that the kingdom will be established supernaturally by God from
without human history, not from within!! This view of St. Augustine provided the church with
the excuse to persecute everyone who refused to become a member of this earthly spiritual
kingdom.

Now we move to the sixth century. Notice the words of Emperor Justinian (the same Justinian
who implemented the decree which began the 1260 years):

“We declare forever infamous, and deprived of their rights, and condemned to exile, all heretics
of either sex, whatever be their name; their property shall be confiscated without hope of
restoration, or of being transmitted to their children by hereditary succession, because crimes
which attack the majesty of God are infinitely more grievous than those which attack the majesty
of earthly princes. With regard to those who are strongly suspected of heresy, if, after having been
ordered by the church, they do not demonstrate their innocence by suitable testimony, they also
shall be declared infamous, and condemned to exile.” (Codex Justinianus, lib. 1, tit. 5, n. 19; cited
in ‘Library of Translations: The Power of the Pope during the Middle Ages,’ M. Gosselin (R. C.), Vol.
I, pp. 83, 84 London: C. Dolman, 1853

Someone might object that it was the emperor who made this decree and not the church.
However, a careful reading reveals that the emperor made this declaration because the church
wished to extirpate heresy. The particular heresy which the church asked Justinian to extirpate
was Arianism. The statement clearly reveals a cooperation of church and state to punish heretics!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 147 of 369
We now move on to the pontificate of Pope Nicholas I (858-867). The attitude of the Roman
Church is now much bolder! Pope Nicholas encouraged the King of Bulgaria, a new convert to
‘Christianity’, to force the religion of his new church upon his subjects. Notice the words of Pope
Nicholas:

“I glorify you for having maintained your authority by putting to death those wandering sheep
who refuse to enter the fold; and . . . congratulate you upon having opened the kingdom of heaven
to the people submitted to your rule. A king need not fear to command massacres, when these
will retain his subjects in obedience, or cause them to submit to the faith of Christ; and God will
reward him in this world, and in eternal life, for these murders.” (Quoted in, R.W. Thompson, The
Papacy and the Civil Power, p. 244)
We must now examine the origin and mechanism of the Holy Office of the Inquisition. The origins
of this organism can be clearly traced to 1227-1233 A. D., during the pontificate of Gregory IX. In
1229 the church council of Toulouse condemned the Albigenses in France and gave orders to
exterminate them. In 1231 Gregory IX in his bull, Excommunicamus, condemned all heretics and
proclaimed specific laws on how to deal with them. Among the provisions were the following:
1) Delivery of heretics to the civil power.
2) Excommunication of all heretics as well as their defenders, followers, friends, and even those who
failed to turn them in.
3) Life imprisonment for all impenitent heretics.
4) Heretics were denied the right to appeal their sentence.
5) Those suspected of heresy had no right to be defended by counsel.
6) Children of heretics were disqualified from holding a church office until the second generation.
7) Heretics who had died without being punished were to be exhumed and their bodies burned.
8) The homes of convicted heretics were to be demolished. (See, G. Barraclough, The Medieval
Papacy, London, 1968, edited by Thames and Hudson, p. 128; and R. I Moore, ‘The Origins of
Medieval Heresy’, in History, vol. 55 (1970), pp. 21-36)

In The Decretals of Gregory IX we find the following:

“Temporal princes shall be reminded and exhorted, and if need be, compelled by spiritual
censures, to discharge every one of their functions; and that, as they desire to be reckoned and
held faithful, so, for the defense of the faith, let them publicly make oath that they will endeavor,
bona fide with all their might, to extirpate from their territories all heretics marked by the church;
so that when any one is about to assume any authority, whether spiritual or temporal, he shall
be held bound to confirm his title by this oath. And if a temporal prince, being required and
admonished by the church, shall neglect to purge his kingdom from this heretical [de]pravity, the
metropolitan and other provincial bishops shall bind him in fetters of excommunication; and if he
obstinately refuse to make satisfaction this shall be notified within a year to the Supreme Pontiff,
that then he may declare his subjects absolved from their allegiance, and leave their lands to be
occupied by Catholics, who, the heretics being exterminated, may possess them unchallenged,
and preserve them in the purity of the faith.” (The Decretals of Gregory IX, book 5, title 7, chapter
13).
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 148 of 369
During the pontificate of Innocent IV (1241-1253), the mechanism of the Inquisition was further
developed. In the papal bull Ad Extirpanda (1252), the following provisions were given the force
of law:

1) Torture must be applied to heretics so as to secure confessions.

2) Those found guilty must be burned at the stake.
3) A police force must be established to serve the needs of the Inquisition.
4) A proclamation of a crusade against all heretics in Italy. Those participating in this crusade
were to be extended the same privileges and indulgences as those who went on crusades
to the Holy Land.
5) The heirs of heretics were to have their goods confiscated as well.

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains:

“In the Bull ‘Ad Extirpanda’ (1252) Innocent IV says: ‘When those adjudged guilty of heresy have
been given up to the civil power by the bishop or his representative, or the Inquisition, the podesta
or chief magistrate of the city shall take them at once, and shall, within five days at the most,
execute the laws made against them’. . . Nor could any doubt remain as to what civil regulations
were meant, for the passages which ordered the burning of the impenitent heretics were inserted
in the papal decretals from the imperial constitutions Commissis nobis and Inconsutibilem
tunicam. The aforesaid Bull ‘Ad Extirpanda’ remained thenceforth a fundamental document of
the Inquisition, renewed or re-enforced by several popes, Alexander IV (1254-61), Clement IV
(1265-68), Nicholas IV (1288-92), Boniface VIII (1294-1303), and others. The civil authorities,
therefore, were enjoined by the popes, under pain of excommunication to execute the legal
sentences that condemned impenitent heretics to the stake” (Joseph Blotzer, article, ‘Inquisition’,
volume VIII, p. 34)

The savagery of Innocent the IV has led the Roman Catholic historian, Peter de Rosa, to state:

“In [Pope] Innocent’s view, it was more wicked for Albigenses to call him the antichrist than for
him to prove it by burning them—men, women, and children by the thousands.” (Peter de Rosa,
Vicars of Christ, p. 225)

Further, de Rosa makes this telling comment:

“Of eighty popes in a line from the thirteenth century on, not one of them disapproved of the
theology and apparatus of the Inquisition. On the contrary, one after another added his own cruel
touches to the workings of this deadly machine.” (Peter de Rosa, Vicars of Christ, pp. 175-176)

It was during this same period that one of the greatest dogmatic theologians in the history of the
Roman Catholic Church added his support to the idea of exterminating heretics. Let’s allow St.
Thomas Aquinas to speak for himself:

“With regard to heretics two elements are to be considered, one element on their side, and the
other on the part of the church. On their side is the sin whereby they have deserved, not only to
be separated from the church by excommunication, but also to be banished from the world by

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 149 of 369
death. For it is a much heavier offense to corrupt the faith, whereby the life of the soul is sustained
than to tamper with the coinage, which is an aid to temporal life. Hence if coiners or other
malefactors are at once handed over by the secular princes to a just death, much more may
heretics, immediately they are convicted of heresy, be not only excommunicated, but also justly
done to die.

“But on the part of the church is mercy in view of the conversion of them that err; and therefore
she does not condemn at once, but ‘after the first and second admonition,’ as the apostle teaches.
After that, however, if the man is still found pertinacious, the church, having no hope of his
conversion, provides for the safety of others, cutting him off from the church by the sentence of
excommunication; and further she leaves him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated from the
world by death.” Joseph Rickaby, S. J., Aquinas Ethicus; or, The Moral Teaching of St. Thomas,
volume. 1, pp. 332, 333 London: Burns and Oates, 1892

The fourteenth century inquisitor, Bernard Gui explained the purpose of the Inquisition:

“. . . the objective of the Inquisition is to destroy heresy; it is not possible to destroy heresy unless
you eradicate the heretics; and it is impossible to eradicate the heretics unless you also eradicate
those who hide them, sympathize with them and protect them.” (Salim Japas, Herejia, Colon y la
Inquisicion (Siloam Springs, Arkansas: Creation Enterprises, 1992), p. 20; translation is mine)

One of the most corrupt popes in the history of the Roman Catholic Church was John XXII. A
Catholic historian describes him as ‘full of avarice, more worldly than a pimp, and with a laugh
that crackled with unimprovable malice.’ (Peter de Rosa, Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side of the
Papacy, p. 212)

According to Peter de Rosa, one of John XXII’s contemporaries stated:

“The blood he shed would have incarnadined the waters of Lake Constance, and the bodies of the
slain would have bridged it from shore to shore.” (Peter de Rosa, Vicars of Christ: The Dark Side
of the Papacy, p. 212)

Though this is obviously hyperbole, the fact still remains that Pope John XXII was a formidable
murderer. Can we imagine Jesus Christ murdering His enemies in cold blood?

Moving on to the fifteenth century, we think of John Wycliffe. The Papacy would have been
delighted to burn him at the stake during his life, but divine providence ruled otherwise. Forty
years after his death, the Council of Constance (1413) ordered his body exhumed and burned.
(See more on this in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, pp. 7-8 and the comments in The Great Controversy,
pp. 95-96)

Notice the words of Pope Martin V (1417-31), written in 1429 to the King of Poland commanding
him to exterminate the Hussites:

“Know that the interests of the Holy See, and those of your crown, make it a duty to exterminate
the Hussites. Remember that these impious persons dare proclaim principles of equality; they
maintain that all Christians are brethren, and that God has not given to privileged men the right

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 150 of 369
of ruling the nations; they hold that Christ came on earth to abolish slavery; they call the people
to liberty, that is, to the annihilation of kings and priests.

While there is still time, then, turn your forces against Bohemia; burn, massacre, make deserts
everywhere, for nothing could be more agreeable to God, or more useful to the cause of kings,
than the extermination of the Hussites.” Quoted in, Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, p.
247). These words were written by Martin V in 1429.

The story of John Hus is very well known. In 1415 he was burned at the stake even though King
Sigismund had guaranteed him safe conduct to defend himself at the Council of Constance (1414-
1418). The remarkable fact is that Sigismund was encouraged to break his word by the Roman
Catholic religious leaders. For a vivid description of the martyrdom of John Hus, read, The Great
Controversy, pp. 109-110 and Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, pp. 19-30.

A year later, Jerome was also burned at the stake. For the fascinating story of how Jerome
recanted his faith and then recanted his recantation, see, The Great Controversy, pp. 112-115
and Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, pp. 31-38. In both of these cases, the trial was held in the Roman
Catholic Cathedral in Constance. After the trial, Hus and Jerome were delivered to the secular
power to be exterminated.

Also in the fifteenth century, Pope Innocent VIII proclaimed a Bull against the Waldenses (1487).
The original text of this Bull is found in the library of the University of Cambridge and an English
translation can be found in John Dowling’s History of Romanism (1871 edition), book 6, chapter
5, section 62. Ellen White, in The Great Controversy, p. 77 quotes a portion of this bull in the
following words:

“Therefore the pope ordered ‘that malicious and abominable sect of malignants,’ if they ‘refuse
to abjure, to be crushed like venomous snakes.’”

Another notable martyr of the fifteenth century was Savonarola. He was martyred in the year
1499 for teaching doctrines such as: we are justified by faith in Christ, church members should
be given both the bread and the wine, the wicked and filthy cardinals and clergy ought to clean
up their act, auricular confession is not necessary, the keys had not been given to Peter alone but
to the universal church, the Pope is not the Supreme Pontiff, etc.

It is reported that the bishop in charge of Savonarola’s execution, stated:

“‘I sever you from the church militant and from the church triumphant’, to which Savonarola
replied: ‘Not from the church triumphant because it is not in your power to do so.’ (For more
information on Savonarola, see, John Foxe, The Book of Martyrs (London: James Nisbet & Co.,
Limited, no date), pp. 43-45

In 1492 Columbus discovered America. Shortly after this time, the Inquisition was planted on its
shores. The atrocities committed by the Spanish Conquistadors are legendary. Indians were
savagely murdered in order to force them to adopt the Roman Catholic religion. Many of these
atrocities are well documented in the book by Salim Japas, Heresy, Columbus and the Inquisition.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 151 of 369
In 1992, when Latin America was celebrating the 500th anniversary of the discovery of America,
many countries refused to participate in the celebration because they remembered the atrocities
which the Roman Catholic Church committed in its conquest of the continent.

For example, in 1992 John Paul II visited Santo Domingo to dedicate a monument in
remembrance of the discovery of America. The visit was not without turmoil. There were heated
protests by the populace and the trip was close to being cancelled. Heightened security was
necessary to protect the Pope from the protesting crowds. Amazingly, in spite of the fact that the
Dominican Republic is an overwhelmingly Catholic country, the attendance at the event was
sparse. I have personally visited Palaces of the Inquisition in Cartagena, Colombia and Santo
Domingo, Dominican Republic where thousands were tried, tortured and martyred.

When St. Ignatius of Loyola established the Society of Jesus (more commonly known as ‘the
Jesuits’) in 1534, it was his avowed purpose to lend his services to the pope in order to extirpate
Protestantism. Till this day there is a statue in St. Peter’s at the Vatican where Loyola is depicted
trampling a Protestant under his feet. It is well known that Loyola was steeped in the occult. In
fact, his Spiritual Exercises were a type of transcendental meditation. It is of more than academic
interest to read the ‘Extreme Oath’ which Jesuits take upon being inducted into the order:

“Now, in the presence of Almighty God, the Blessed virgin Mary, the Blessed Michael, the
archangel, the Blessed St. John the Baptist, the Holy Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul and all the
saints and sacred hosts of heaven, and to you, my ghostly father, the Superior General of the
Society of Jesus, founded by St. Ignatius Loyola, in the pontificate of Paul the Third, and continued
to the present, do by the womb of the Virgin, the matrix of God, and the rod of Jesus Christ, declare
and swear, that his holiness the pope is Christ’s Vice-regent and is the true and only Head of the
Catholic or Universal Church throughout the earth; and that by virtue of the keys of binding and
loosing, given to his Holiness by my Savior, Jesus Christ, he has power to depose heretical kings,
princes, states, commonwealths and governments, all being illegal without his sacred
confirmation and that they may safely be destroyed.

“Therefore, to the utmost of my power, I shall and will defend this doctrine and his Holiness’ right
and custom against all usurpers of the heretical or protestant authority whatever, especially the
Lutheran Church of Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and the now pretended
authority and churches of England and Scotland, and branches of the same, now established in
Ireland and on the continent of America and elsewhere; and all adherents in regard that they be
usurped or heretical, opposing the sacred Mother church of Rome. I do now renounce and disown
any allegiance as due to any heretical king, prince or state named Protestants or Liberals or
obedience to any of their laws, magistrates or officers.

“I do further declare that the doctrines of the churches of England and Scotland, of the Calvinists,
Huguenotes and others of the name Protestants or Liberals to be damnable, and they themselves
damned and to be damned who will not forsake the same.

“I do further declare, that I will help, assist and advise all or any of his Holiness’ agents in any
place wherever I shall be, in Switzerland, Germany, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, England,
Ireland or America, or in any other kingdom or territory I shall come to, and do my uttermost to
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 152 of 369
extirpate the heretical Protestants or Liberals’ doctrines and to destroy all their pretended powers,
regal or otherwise.

“I do further promise and declare, that notwithstanding I am dispensed with, to assume any
religion heretical for the propagating of the Mother Church’s interest to keep secret and private
all her agents’ counsels from time to time, as they may entrust me, and not to divulge, directly or
indirectly, by word, writing or circumstance whatever; but to execute all that shall be proposed,
given in charge or discovered unto me, by you, my ghostly father, or by any of this sacred
covenant.

“I do further promise and declare that I will have no opinion or will of my own, or any mental
reservation whatever, even as a corpse or cadaver (perinde al cadaver) but will unhesitatingly
obey each and every command that I receive from my superiors in the Militia of the Pope and of
Jesus Christ.

“That I will go to any part of the world withersoever I may be sent, to the frozen regions of the
North, the burning sand of the desert of Africa, or the jungles of India, to the centres of civilizations
of Europe, without murmuring or repining, and will be submissive in all things whatsoever
communicated to me.

“I furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage
relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed
to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare
neither age, sex or condition; and that I will hang, burn, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive
these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants’
heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race. That when the same
cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of
the poinard, or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person
or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at anytime may
be directed so to do by any agent of the Pope or superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of
the Society of Jesus.”

“In confirmation of which, I hereby dedicate my life, my soul and all my corporeal powers, and
with this dagger which I now receive, I will subscribe my name written in my own blood, in
testimony thereof; and should I prove false or weaken in my determination, may my brethren and
fellow soldiers of the Militia of the Pope cut off my hands and my feet, and my throat from ear to
ear, my belly opened and sulphur burned therein, with all the punishment that can be inflicted
upon me on earth and my soul be tortured by demons in an eternal hell forever!”

“All of which I, M_______ N__________, do swear by the blessed Trinity and blessed Sacrament,
which I am now to receive, to perform and on my part to keep inviolably; and do call all the
heavenly and glorious host of heaven to witness these my real intentions to keep this my oath.”

“In testimony thereof I take this most holy and blessed Sacrament of the Eucharist and witness
the same further, with my name written with the point of this dagger dipped in my own blood

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 153 of 369
and sealed in the face of this holy covenant.” [He receives the wafer from the superior and writes
his name with the point of his dagger dipped in his own blood taken from over his heart].”

(It was not easy to find this information. I personally researched this material in the rare books
division of the Library of Congress. Because no photocopying is allowed, I transcribed this
quotation by hand. It comes from the following source: Edwin Allen Sherman [a 32 degree Free
Mason], The Engineer Corps of Hell, San Francisco, 1883, pp. 119-122. The book bears the
following bibliographical information: Library of Congress copyright, Nov. 23, 1883, rare book
collection, card # 13653-01 (Bx1765.556). The book reads on the front cover: ‘Sold by private
subscription only, and under stipulated conditions.’

Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621), of Counter-Reformation fame, wrote the following

about punishment due heretics:

“The only effective means against heretics is to convey them to that place provided for them as
quickly as possible. In this way one is only doing them a favor as the longer they are allowed to
live, the more heresies they will devise, and thus the more believers they will seduce, aggravating
their own damnation.” Quoted in, Symposium on Revelation, volume 2, p. 345. The story of the
martyrdom of William Tyndale is worthy of note. He was convicted of the ‘crime’ of translating
and distributing the Bible in the English language. For a description of his life, work and death,
read The Great Controversy, pp. 245-247 and also, Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, pp. 108-116.

One of the most infamous acts in the history of Roman Catholicism was the St. Bartholomew
Massacre. It took place on August 24, 1572 with the gleeful approval of Pope Gregory XIII and the
priesthood. Ellen White calls this the ‘blackest in the black catalog of crime, most horrible among
the fiendish deeds of all the dreadful centuries’ (The Great Controversy, p. 272). At the tolling of
a bell, Protestants [they were called Huguenots] were slaughtered without mercy, not only in
Paris but also throughout the rest of France. In the course of two months, over 70,000 men,
women and children perished. The Huguenots were the ‘professionals’ of the day. They were the
‘cream’ of France. At the news of the massacre, Pope Gregory XIII, attended by his cardinals and
other ecclesiastical dignitaries, went in a long procession to the church of St. Louis, where the
cardinal of Lorraine chanted a Te Deum [an anthem of praise to God]. A medal was struck to
commemorate the massacre. On one side of the medal was the face of Gregory XIII and on the
other is the image of the destroying angel. (For more on this savage event, read, The Great
Controversy, pp. 272-273)

How could one forget the Piedmont Massacre of the year 1655? On January 25 of this year, the
Duke of Savoy gave an edict that the Waldenses must convert to the Catholic faith or leave the
valleys and have their properties confiscated within a few days. If they did not leave, they were
subject to a death decree. The edict was proclaimed in the middle of the winter. On April
seventeenth, 15,000 soldiers invaded the valleys of the Piedmont. Thousands of Waldenses were
murdered, tortured and enslaved. Hundreds who were able to escape to the most rugged areas
of the mountains were caught and thrown off the jagged cliff of Mount Catelluzo near Torre
Pellice. Salim Japas, Herejia, Colon y la Inquisicion (Siloam Springs, Arkansas: Creation
Enterprises, 1992), pp. 62-63.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 154 of 369
Jean Antoine Llorente was Secretary to the Spanish Inquisition from the year 1790 to 1792.
Regarding this monstrous mechanism, Llorente says:

“I was secretary of the Inquisition in the court of Madrid in the years 1789, 1790 and 1791. I knew
the establishment well enough to refute it. [It was] vicious in its origin, constitution and laws in
spite of the apologies which have been written in its favor.” Jean Antoine Llorente, Historia Critica
de la Inquisicion en España, Madrid, 1822, pp. 6-7

Llorente adds:

“The horrid conduct of this Holy Office [Inquisition] weakened the power and diminished the
population of Spain by arresting the progress of the arts, sciences, industry and commerce, and
by compelling multitudes of families to abandon the kingdom; by instigating the expulsion of the
Jews and Moors, and by immolating on its flaming shambles more than three hundred thousand
victims” Quoted in, Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, p. 244

Llorente was not some Protestant enemy of the Roman Catholic Church. He was an insider being
privy to the inner workings and statistics of the Inquisition in Spain. According to Llorente, of the
300,000 who were killed by the Inquisition in Spain, 31,912 were burned at the stake (Llorente,
p. 583).

In Pius IX’s Encyclical and Syllabus (December 8, 1864) we find the following words:

“Cursed be they who assert liberty of conscience and of worship, and such as maintain the church
should not employ force. The State has not the right to leave every man free to embrace whatever
religion he shall deem true.”

Or again, listen to the words of Leo XIII in his encyclical, Libertas Humanam:

“From what has been said, it follows that it is quite unlawful to demand, to defend, or to grant
unconditional freedom of thought, of speech, of writing, or of worship, as if these were so many
rights given by nature to man.” Quoted in, Seventh-day Adventist Bible Students’ Source Book,
‘Church and State,’ Paragraph 496 (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association,
1962), p. 273

Notice the words of the Roman Catholic historian J. H. Ignaz Von Dollinger:

“Through the influence of Gratian. . . and unwearied activity of the Popes and their legates since
1183, the view of the Church had been. . .[that] every departure from the teaching of the Church,
and every important opposition to any ecclesiastical ordinances, must be punished with death,
and with the most cruel of deaths, by fire. . .

“Innocent III declared ‘the mere refusal to swear, and the opinion that oaths were unlawful, a
heresy worthy of death, and directed that whoever differed in any respect from the common way
of life of the multitude should be treated as a heretic.’
“Both the initiation and carrying out of this new principle must be ascribed to the Popes alone...
It was the Popes who compelled bishops and priests to condemn the heterodox to torture,

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 155 of 369
confiscation of their goods, imprisonment, and death, and to enforce the execution of this
sentence on the civil authorities, under pain of excommunication.

“From 1200 to 1500 the long series of Papal ordinances on the Inquisition, ever increasing in
severity and cruelty, and their whole policy towards heresy, runs on without break. It is a rigidly
consistent system of legislation; every Pope confirms and improves upon the devices of his
predecessor. All is directed to the one end, of completely uprooting every difference of belief. . .

“It was only the absolute dictation of the Popes, and the notion of their infallibility in all questions
of Evangelical morality, that made the Christian world. . . . [permit] the Inquisition, which
contradicted the simplest principles of Christian justice and love to our neighbor, and would have
been rejected with universal horror in the ancient Church.” (J. H. Ignaz Von Dollinger, The Pope
and the Council, pp. 190-192)

Notice the words of Dr. Marianus de Luca, a Jesuit and former professor of Canon Law at the
Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome:

“The Catholic Church has the right and duty to kill heretics because it is by fire and sword that
heresy can be extirpated. Mass excommunication is derided by heretics. If they are imprisoned or
exiled they corrupt others. The only recourse is to put them to death. Repentance cannot be
allowed to save civil criminals; for the highest good of the church is the duty of the faith, and this
cannot be preserved unless heretics are put to death” (Quoted in Lorraine Boettner, Roman
Catholicism, p. 426).

Dr. de Luca further remarked:

“Heretics despise excommunication and say that that bolt is powerless; if you threaten them with
a pecuniary fine, they neither fear God nor respect men, knowing that they will find fools enough
to believe them and support them. If you imprison them or send them into exile, they corrupt
those near them with their words and those at a distance with their books. So THE ONLY REMEDY
IS TO SEND THEM SOON TO THEIR OWN PLACE [capitals are the author’s].”

And what does de Luca mean with the expression ‘send them soon to their own place’? He
answers by approvingly quoting Tanner:

“The civil magistrate, by the command and commission of the Church, ought to punish the heretic
with the penalty of death. . .” (Marianus de Luca, Institutes of Public Ecclesiastical Law, (1901)
vol. I, pp. 143, 261)

It is worth noting that de Luca’s book contains a warm letter of commendation from Pope Leo
XIII as well as the Imprimatur of the Roman Catholic Church.

The Roman Catholic professor, Alfred Baudrillart makes the following comment about the role of
the Church in the incitation of violence during the 1260 years:

“She [the Church] has, and she loudly proclaims that she has, a ‘horror of blood’. Nevertheless
when confronted by heresy she does not content herself with persuasion; arguments of an
intellectual and moral order appear to her insufficient and she has recourse to force, to corporeal
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 156 of 369
punishment, to torture. She creates tribunals like those of the Inquisition, she calls the laws of the
State to her aid, if necessary she encourages a crusade, or a religious war and all her ‘horror of
blood’ practically culminates into urging the secular power to shed it, which proceeding is almost
more odious—for it is less frank—than shedding it herself.

“Especially did she act thus in the sixteenth century with regard to Protestants. Not content to
reform morally, to preach by example, to convert people by eloquent and holy missionaries, she
lit in Italy, in the Low Countries, and above all in Spain the funeral piles of the Inquisition. In France
under Francis I, and Henry II., in England under Mary Tudor, she tortured heretics, whilst both in
France and Germany during the second half of the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth
century if she did not actually begin at any rate she encouraged and actively aided the religious
wars.” (Alfred Baudrillart, The Catholic Church, the Renaissance and Protestantism, translated
by Mrs. Philip Gibbs [London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd., 1908], pp. 182, 183

Now notice the words of Alexis M. Lepicier, professor of sacred theology in the Pontifical Urban
College of the Propaganda in Rome:

“He who publicly avows a heresy and tries to pervert others by word or example, speaking
absolutely, can not only be excommunicated but even justly put to death, lest he ruin others by
pestilential contagion; for a bad man is worse than a wild beast, and does more harm, as Aristotle
says. Hence, as it is not wrong to kill a wild beast which does great harm, so it must be right to
deprive of his harmful life a heretic who withdraws from divine truth and plots against the
salvation of others.” (Fr. Alexis M. Lepicier, De Stabilitate et Progressu Dogmatis, [printed at the
official printing office in Rome in 1910], p. 194.

The following words from The Tablet, the official newspaper of the Roman Catholic diocese of
Brooklyn, New York are very telling:

“Heresy is an awful crime against God, and those who start a heresy are more guilty than they
who are traitors to the civil government. If the State has the right to punish treason with death,
the principle is the same which concedes to the spiritual authority the power of capital
punishment over the arch-traitor to truth and divine revelation. . . A perfect society has the right
to its existence . . . and the power of capital punishment is acknowledged for a perfect society.
Now . . . the Roman Catholic Church is a perfect society, and as such has the right and power to
take means to safeguard its existence.” The Tablet, November 5, 1938

Louis Veuillot expressed the Roman Catholic view of freedom with the following words:

“Be we Catholics in the minority, we will then demand freedom on the basis of your principles; be
we Catholics in the majority, we will then refuse it on the basis of our principles.” Quoted in
Symposium on Revelation, volume 2, p. 347)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 157 of 369
The Catholic Encyclopedia admits:

“. . . judged by contemporary standards, the Inquisition, especially as it developed in Spain toward

the close of the Middle Ages, can be classified only as one of the darker chapters in the history of
the Church.”

The same encyclopedia acknowledges the killing of 2000 Protestants within 50 years in the
Netherlands and admits the death of perhaps 3000 to 4000 French Huguenots in the Massacre
of Saint Bartholomew, which commenced on the night of August 23, 1572. Quoted from the New
Catholic Encyclopedia by C. Mervyn Maxwell, God Cares, volume l (Boise, Idaho: Pacific Press,
1981), p. 132

An article in the Roman Catholic journal The Rambler, gives us a picture of what would happen if
the Roman Catholic Church were in the majority in England:

“You ask, if he [the Roman Catholic] were lord in the land, and you were in the minority, if not in
numbers yet in power, what would he do to you? That, we say, would entirely depend upon the
circumstances. If it would benefit the cause of Catholicism, he would tolerate you: if expedient,
he would imprison you, banish you, fine you; possibly even hang you. But be assured of one thing:
he would never tolerate you for the sake of the ‘glorious principles of civil and religious liberty’. .
.

“Catholicism is the most intolerant of creeds. It is intolerance itself, for it is truth itself. We might
as rationally maintain that a sane man has a right to believe that two and two do not make four,
as this theory of religious liberty. Its impiety is only equaled by its absurdity. . . .

“A Catholic temporal government would be guided in its treatment of Protestants and other
recusants solely by the rules of expediency, adopting precisely that line of conduct which would
tend best to their conversion, and to prevent the dissemination of their errors.” ‘Civil and Religious
Liberty’, The Rambler, 8 (September, 1851), pp. 174, 178

We must now make a few remarks about the recent apology of Pope John Paul II. In a remarkable
moment at St. Peter’s Basilica on the first Sunday of Lent, March 12, 2000, the Pope, in a carefully
choreographed mass, leaning against the crucifix and with agonizing voice, seemed to apologize
for the sins which the church has committed against Protestants, Jews, non-Christians,
immigrants, ethnic minorities, women, abused children and the unborn. We quote the key
portion of his homily:

“We forgive and we ask forgiveness! . . . We cannot not recognize the betrayals of the Gospel
committed by some of our brothers, especially during the second millennium. We ask forgiveness
for the divisions between Christians, for the use of violence that some have resorted to in the
service of truth and for the acts of dissidence and of hostility sometimes taken towards followers
of other religions.” (As quoted in, The New York Times, ‘Pope Asks Forgiveness for Errors of the
Church Over 2,000 Years’, Monday, March 13, 2000, Section A, pp. 1, 10; emphasis supplied)

Several remarks must be made at this juncture. First, this was a general, sweeping apology. No
specific persons are mentioned as culprits. No specific events are brought to light. For example,

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 158 of 369
the Crusades are not mentioned. The Inquisition is not mentioned. The forced conversions of the
natives in Africa and the Americas are not mentioned. The Bible teaches that sincere and true
repentance and confession must be specific and complete. The Pope’s apology misses the mark
in this regard.

Furthermore, and more importantly, the apology never blames the church for these sins. It will
be noticed that the Pope’s paragraph quoted above is carefully worded. It blames ‘some of our
brothers’, but never blames the Church as such. In other words, in the Pope’s mind, the Church
was not to blame but rather certain individuals in the church. Regarding this, Thomas Reeves,
editor of the Jesuit magazine America, remarks:

“The document should have put it in bold print that ‘children of the church’ includes popes,
cardinals and clergy, and not just people in the pews. . . The pope had a great idea that some in
the Vatican are obscuring with a fog machine.” Quoted in the New York Times article referred to
above, Section ‘A’, p. 10

It is significant that the Pope mentions the betrayal of the Gospel ‘especially during the second
millennium’. This was the millennium during which the Roman Catholic Church was guilty of the
Crusades, the Inquisition and the forced conversions of the natives in the Americas and Africa.
Thus, though the Pope is nebulous about specific persons and events, he does admit that many
wrongs were committed.

It is interesting that the Pope refers to ‘the violence [he does admit there was violence] that some
[notice the unspecific ‘some’] have resorted to in the service of truth’. It is clear that the Pope is
saying that those who committed these crimes were right in their cause (the service of truth) but
were wrong in their method (violence). However, when you defend the truth with violence, are
you really defending the truth? Are you not rather smearing the truth? And then there is the
question as to whether the truth which was being defended was really the truth at all!!

Also worthy of note is that this apology was not a spontaneous gesture. In fact, it was the
culmination of a long, drawn out process. The apology was written and re-written, edited and re-
edited, worded and re-worded, debated and analyzed for years before the Pope presented it on
March 12. Regarding this, the aforementioned article in The New York Times gives us a little
history:

“The need for Catholics to examine their collective conscience is something that this pope has
been thinking about for years, and he laid out his rationale for it in a 1994 apostolic letter called,
‘The Coming of the Third Millennium.’ He also raised the subject privately in meetings with key
cardinals, and his proposal was sufficiently ground-breaking that they requested that the
theological and historical implications first be studied in depth.

“The result was a dense 31-page treatise by the International Theological Commission which, with
Vatican oversight, ground out the theological precedents and also the limits to the apology.

“Written by a committee and released earlier this month, the document addresses concerns that
the apology will be misunderstood or misused by those ‘hostile to the church’. It also reflects other
worries of theologians, who had to grapple with such complex issues as how a church that
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 159 of 369
considers itself holy can admit mistakes, and whether it is fair for today’s church to condemn acts
by previous generations made in good if misguided faith.” Emphasis supplied

The Bible teaches that confession should be spontaneous, complete, unconditional and without
measuring the consequences. It is obvious that the process which was followed had the intention
of preserving the self-image of the Church and at the same time, giving the impression that the
church was sorry for the sins of the past! This leads us to one final consideration. Why did the
apology come at this particular moment in history? Why didn’t any of the previous popes in the
history of the Roman Catholic Church offer this apology? Why now?

The simple explanation is that we live in an ecumenical age. The Roman Catholic Church enjoys
more popularity today than at any previous moment in the last 200 years. This apology gives the
impression that the Roman Church is docile and repentant. It enhances its image among
Protestants and other non-Catholics. In the same New York Times article, Alessandra Stanley
remarks that the Pope ‘has said repeatedly that the new evangelization he is calling for in the
third millennium can take place only after what he has described as a church-wide purification of
memory.’”

By the expression, ‘new evangelization’ the Pope simply means, the conversion of the world to
the Roman Catholic Church. Rev. Lorenzo Albacete, who teaches theology at St. Joseph’s
Seminary in Yonkers, New York stated:

“Because it reflects this pope’s desire to reconcile with other Christians and other religions, people
are tempted to view it as a tactic, but its immense spiritual importance to this pope lies in the fact
that it did not come within diplomatic or theological agreement, but in the liturgy of the Mass
during Lent and the Holy Year.” Quoted in the same article above

Though Albacete and others deny that the Pope’s apology is a ‘tactic,’ Bible prophecy makes it
very clear that it is just that!! The real reason why the Pope chose St. Peter’s Basilica as the place
and the Mass of the first day of Lent as the occasion to offer the apology is that he knew that the
media would come out en masse to hear the apology. A pastoral letter, an encyclical or a
theological proclamation would never have had the same impact!!

Notice the chilling prophetic words of Ellen G. White in the 1911 edition of The Great
Controversy, p. 571:

“The Roman Church now presents a fair front to the world, covering with apologies her record of
horrible cruelties. She has clothed herself in Christlike garments; but she is unchanged. Every
principle of the papacy that existed in past ages exists today. The doctrines devised in the darkest
ages are still held. Let none deceive themselves. The papacy that Protestants are now so ready to
honor is the same that ruled the world in the days of the Reformation, when men of God stood
up, at the peril of their lives, to expose her iniquity. She possesses the same pride and arrogant
assumption that lorded it over kings and princes, and claimed the prerogatives of God. Her spirit
is no less cruel and despotic now than when she crushed out human liberty and slew the saints of
the Most High.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 160 of 369
She further affirms:
“The papacy is just what prophecy declared that she would be, the apostasy of the latter times.
(2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4) It is part of her policy to assume the character which will best accomplish
her purpose; but beneath the variable appearance of the chameleon she conceals the invariable
venom of the serpent.”
As an addendum to this section, I would like to underline that almost two weeks after the Pope’s
apology he visited the Yad Vashem [Holocaust Memorial] in Jerusalem. Once again he expressed
regret over the Holocaust but he never affirmed that the church was to blame nor did he deplore
the silence of Pope Pius XII while 6 million Jews were being slaughtered!! An article in the Los
Angeles Times (March 24, 2000, section A, pages 1 and 10) bears the title: John Paul Laments the
Horrors of Holocaust. The subtitle of this article is very telling. It reads: “Israeli premier hails visit
as ‘historic journey of healing’ between Christians and Jews. Pontiff’s message at memorial,
however, falls short of apology for Vatican’s wartime silence”. According to this article, the Pope
said:

“No one can forget or ignore what happened; no one can diminish its scale. We wish to remember.
But we wish to remember for a purpose—namely, to ensure that never again will evil prevail.”

Nothing is said here about the sinful silence of the Church during the Holocaust nor is there any
ascription of blame to Pius XII. The article furthermore continues:

“His categorical and at times poetic message fell short of the apology that some Jewish leaders
had demanded for the failure of his World War II-era predecessor, Pius XII, to speak out during
the extermination of 6 million European Jews.

“Instead, John Paul uttered a sweeping lament ‘as bishop of Rome,’ assuring the Jewish people
that his church ‘is deeply saddened by the hatred, acts of persecution and displays of anti-
Semitism directed against the Jews by Christians at any time and in any place.’” Emphasis
supplied

Once again, one marvels at how John Paul can make such generalized statements in such a
specific place!! Incidentally, neither Hitler, nor Mussolini nor Himmler nor any other key player
in the Holocaust was ever excommunicated by the Roman Catholic Church. Silence certainly
speaks louder than words in this case!!
Characteristic #7:

Daniel 7:25 tells us that the little horn would also think to change the times. We must now ask
the question: What are these ‘times’ and how did the little horn attempt to change them? These
questions have been fully answered in Pastor Stephen P. Bohr’s book: Futurism’s Incredible
Journey.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 161 of 369
Characteristic #8:

We must now move on to the eighth characteristic of the little horn. Daniel 7:25 also tells us that
the little horn thought he could change the law. It is clear in Daniel seven that the little horn is
guilty primarily of transgression of the law. We offer the following examples: The little horn slays
the saints [sixth commandment], blasphemes the name of God [third commandment], thinks he
can change the law [fourth commandment], and proclaims himself God [first commandment].
Revelation 13 adds the fact that this power demands worship to the image he has raised up
[second commandment] and Revelation 17 adds that this power fornicates with the kings of the
earth [seventh commandment]. In II Thessalonians 2, the Apostle Paul informs us that this power
performs lying wonders [ninth commandment]. It is obvious that this little horn stands accused
of trampling upon God’s law, primarily the first table.

The question might legitimately be asked: How can the little horn be judged by the Ten
Commandments starting in 1844 if the law was nailed to the cross when Jesus died? Daniel 7
gives us indisputable proof that the law was still binding in 1844!

A careful examination of church history reveals that the Roman Catholic Church has attempted
to change God’s holy Law. And how did this happen?

In 1993 I was holding an evangelistic series in Albuquerque, New Mexico and I decided to visit
Garsten’s Catholic Book Store at San Mateo and I-40. The purpose of my visit was to examine as
many Roman Catholic catechisms as possible in order to determine how the Roman Catholic
Church teaches the Ten Commandments. I examined at least 20 different catechisms and
discovered some very interesting information. None of these catechisms contained the second
commandment. The absence of this commandment in the catechisms is understandable. It
forbids the worship of idols and the Roman Catholic churches are filled with idols.

By deleting the second commandment, the Roman Catholic Church ends up with only nine, but
the Bible makes it clear that there are ten! So the catechisms divide the tenth commandment
into two parts. Number 9 is ‘Do not covet your neighbor’s wife’, and number 10 is ‘Do not covet
your neighbor’s goods’. By thus dividing commandment # 10 the Roman Catholic Church ends up
once again with the ‘Ten Commandments.’ The recent Catechism of the Catholic Church has tried
to soften this change by saying that the first and second commandments are really one and the
tenth is really two. However, the undeniable fact remains that the catechisms rarely, if ever,
discuss the second commandment.

But the Roman Catholic catechisms go even further. Invariably, they encourage the faithful to
attend mass and rest on Sunday in fulfillment of the third commandment!! First of all, it is the
fourth commandment which commands us to rest. But this same commandment also commands
us to worship on the 7th day Sabbath, and not on Sunday, the first day of the week! How can the
Roman Catholic Church blatantly command the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week,
when, in its own Bibles command us to worship on Sabbath, the 7th day of the week? The answer
is simple. The Roman Catholic Church claims that Christ gave it the authority to change the day

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 162 of 369
from Sabbath to Sunday (more on this when we speak about the 11 th characteristic of the little
horn). In this way, the Roman Catholic Church is guilty of attempting to change the Law of God.
Before we examine Roman Catholic publications on the change of the Sabbath, we must make a
few remarks about the manner in which the change took place. The shift from Sabbath to Sunday
did not happen overnight. It was a slow, though relentless process. Regarding this, Ellen White
remarks:
“The archdeceiver had not completed his work. He was resolved to gather the Christian world
under his banner and to exercise his power through his vice-regent, the proud pontiff who
claimed to be the representative of Christ. Through half-converted pagans, ambitious prelates,
and world-loving churchmen he accomplished his purpose. Vast councils were held from time to
time, in which the dignitaries of the church were convened from all the world. In nearly every
council the Sabbath which God instituted was pressed down a little lower, while the Sunday
was correspondingly exalted. Thus the pagan festival came finally to be honored as a divine
institution, while the Bible Sabbath was pronounced a relic of Judaism, and its observers were
declared to be accursed.” Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 53. Emphasis supplied

Ellen G. White has provided three significant insights in this quotation which have been
irrefutably corroborated by the exhaustive research of Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi in his books,
From Sabbath to Sunday and Anti-Judaism and the Origin of Sunday. The first is that Sunday
was bequeathed to the Christian Church by paganism. Secondly, Sunday was adopted because
of strong feelings against the Jews, and third, the process of the change was slow but steady.
Space will not allow me to amplify points one and two but we must dedicate some time to point
#3.

Even though some Early Church Fathers (not the Apostolic Fathers!) admittedly advocated the
observance of Sunday in honor of the resurrection, not one of them ever provided any Biblical
justification for the practice. They simply stated that because Jesus resurrected the first day of
the week, it should be the day to honor Him.

Emperor Constantine’s famous Sunday law is well known. It was given on March 7, AD 321:

“Let all the judges and town people, and the occupation of all trades, rest on the venerable day
of the sun; but let those who are situated in the country, freely and at full liberty attend to the
business of agriculture, because it often happens that no other day is so fit for sowing corn and
planting vines; lest the critical moment being let slip, men should lose the commodities granted
by heaven. Given the seventh day of March, Crispus and Constantine being consuls, each of them
for the second time.” Corpus Juris Civilis 2.127, quoted in, Henry Bettenson, ed., Documents of
the Christian Church, 2nd edition (London: Oxford University Press, 1963).

It must be remembered that this decree was proclaimed by the civil power. It was not a decree
given by the church. However, the church would soon put itself officially on the record as a strong
supporter of this decree.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 163 of 369
This decree of Constantine is preserved with some slight modifications in the Code of Justinian:

“All judges and city people and the craftsmen shall rest upon the venerable Day of the Sun.
Country people, however, may freely attend to the cultivation of the fields, because it frequently
happens that no other days are better adapted for planting grain in the furrows or the vines in
trenches. So that the advantage given by heavenly providence may not for the occasion of a short
time perish.” Code of Justinian, b. 3, title 12,3; translated in Ayer’s Source Book for Ancient Church
History, item 59 (g)
It will be noticed that this decree did not forbid Sabbath worship. That was still to come.
It was at the Council of Laodicea [celebrated sometime between 343 and 381 AD], that the
Church put itself on the record as enjoining Sunday worship and forbidding Sabbath worship.
Canon 29 of this Council reads as follows:

“Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday [Greek sabbaton, the Sabbath] but shall work
on that day, but the Lord’s Day [Sunday] they shall especially honor, and, as being Christians,
shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut
out from Christ.” (Translated in, Charles Joseph Hefele, A History of the Christian Councils, vol. 2,
translated and edited by H. N. Oxenham [Edinburg: T. and T. Clark, 1896], p. 316)

As the centuries passed, the Sabbath was pressed lower and lower and the Sunday was exalted
higher and higher. We next present a statement by St. Thomas Aquinas, a theologian unparalleled
in the history of the Roman Catholic Church:

“In the New Law the keeping of the Sunday supplants that of the Sabbath, not in virtue of the
precept of the law, but through determination by the church and the custom of the Christian
people.” (Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas, quoted in The Sabbath in Scripture and History,
pp. 205-206) Emphasis supplied

Around the year 1400 AD, Petrus de Anchorano offered the following justification for the
modification of God’s Law:

“. . . the pope can modify divine law, since his power if not of man, but of God, and he acts in the
place of God upon earth, with the fullest power of binding and losing his sheep.” Lucius Ferraris,
Prompta Bibliotheca, 8 volumes, vol. 2, article ‘Papa’. The power of binding and loosing is
discussed under point # 11.

When Martin Luther debated John Eck, Luther brought forth the weapons of Scripture whereas
Eck brought forth the weapons of tradition. As long as Luther stood on the solid rock of Sola
Scriptura, his arguments were unanswerable. However, there was one area where Eck took
Luther’s own weapon and turned it against him:

“The Scripture teaches ‘Remember that you sanctify the day of the Sabbath; six days shall you
labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God.’ etc. But the
Church has changed the Sabbath into the Lord’s [day] by its own authority, concerning which you
have no scripture. . . The Sabbath is commanded many times by God; neither in the Gospels nor
in Paul is it declared that the Sabbath has ceased; nevertheless the Church has instituted the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 164 of 369
Lord’s Day through the tradition of the apostles without Scripture.” (Johann Eck, Enchiridion
Locorum Communium . . . Adversus Lutheranos [Handbook of Common Places against the
Lutherans]. Venice: Ioan. Antonius & Fratres de Sabio, 1533, fols. 4v, 5r, 42v. Latin. Trans. by Frank
H. Yost. Used by permission of Mrs. Frank Yost. [FRS No. 127]

This quotation can be found in the Seventh-day Adventist Source Book, paragraph # 1445. Bold
is mine.

Also from Dr. Eck we find the following:

“If, however, the church has had power to change the Sabbath of the Bible into Sunday and to
command Sunday keeping, why should it not have also this power concerning other days, many
of which are based on the Scriptures—such as Christmas, circumcision of the heart, three kings,
etc. If you omit the latter, and turn from the church to the Scriptures alone, then you must keep
the Sabbath with the Jews, which has been kept from the beginning of the world.” Johann Eck,
Enchiridion Locorum Communium. . . Adversus Lutheranos, pp. 78, 79. [Quoted in Andrews and
Conradi, History of the Sabbath, 1912 edition, p. 587]

Chalk one up for Doctor Eck! His argument is irrefutable. Luther, however, tried to get off the
hook by claiming that the specific day was ceremonial while the principle of rest on one day in
seven was still binding. This unbiblical argument has been picked up by Protestants, but the fact
still remains that it is based on human reasoning and not upon the Word of God!!

We now turn to the longest church council in the history of the Roman Catholic Church (1545-
1563). It was the avowed purpose of the Council of Trent to stem the phenomenal growth of
Protestantism. On January 18, 1562, Gaspare de Fosso, archbishop of Reggio spoke the following
words:

“The authority of the church is illustrated most clearly by the Scriptures for while on the one hand
she [the church] recommends them, declares them to be divine, [and] offers them to us to be read,
. . . on the other hand, the legal precepts in the Scriptures taught by the Lord have ceased by virtue
of the same authority [the church]. The Sabbath, the most glorious day in the law, has been
changed into the Lord’s Day. . . These and other similar matters have not ceased by virtue of
Christ’s teaching (for He says He has come to fulfill the law, not to destroy it), but they have been
changed by the authority of the church.” (Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum, 33:529-530)

We will now quote a great number of Roman Catholic publications which explain why Sunday is
kept instead of the Sabbath. Please pay careful attention to the number of times these
publications claim that the Church has made the change, transfer or substitution of Sunday in
place of the Sabbath. The bold is mine unless otherwise indicated.

“Question: Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of
precept?

“Answer: Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists
agree with her,—she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the
week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 165 of 369
authority.” Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism, approved by the Most Reverend John
Hughes, D. D., Archbishop of New York (New York: Edward Dunigan & Brother, 1851), p. 174

“Question: By whom was it [the Sabbath] changed?

“Answer: By the governors of the church, the apostles, who also kept it; for St. John was in the
Spirit on the Lord’s Day (which was Sunday). Apoc. 1:10.”

“Question: How prove you that the church hath power to command feasts and holy days?

“Answer: By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and
therefore they fondly contradict themselves by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other
feasts commanded by the same church.”

“Question: How prove you that?”

“Answer: Because by keeping Sunday, they acknowledge the church’s power to ordain feasts, and
to command them under sin; and by not keeping the rest [of the feasts] by her commanded, they
again deny, in fact, the same power. Reverend Henry Tuberville, D. D. (New York: Edward Dunigan
and Brothers, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine, approved in 1833), p. 58.

“The first precept in the Bible is that of sanctifying the seventh day: ‘God blessed the seventh day,
and sanctified it’ (Gen. 2:3). This precept was confirmed by God in the Ten Commandments:
‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God’
(Exodus 20). On the other hand, Christ declares that He is not come to destroy the law, but to
fulfill it (Matt. 5:17). He Himself observed the Sabbath: ‘and, as His custom was, He went into the
synagogue on the Sabbath day’ (Luke 4:16). His disciples likewise observed it after His death: ‘They
rested on the Sabbath day according to the commandment’ (Luke 23:56). Yet with all this weight
of Scripture authority for keeping the Sabbath, or seventh day, holy, Protestants of all
denominations make this a profane day, and transfer the obligation of it to the first day of the
week, or the Sunday. Now what authority have they for doing this? None, whatever, except the
unwritten word, or tradition of the Catholic Church which declares that the apostles made the
change in honor of Christ’s resurrection, and the descent of the Holy Ghost on that day of the
week.” John Milner, End of Religious Controversy, (New York: P. J. Kenedy, 1897), p. 89

“This observance of the Sabbath [here the author refers to Sunday as the Sabbath] in which, after
all, the only Protestant worship consists—not only has no foundation in the Bible, but it is in
flagrant contradiction with its letter, which commands rest on the Sabbath, which is Saturday.

“It was the Catholic Church which, by the authority of Jesus Christ, has transferred this rest to the
Sunday in remembrance of the resurrection of our Lord. Thus the observance of Sunday by
Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the Church.
Monsignor Segur, Plain Talk About the Protestantism of Today (Boston: Thomas B. Noonan &
Co., 1868), p. 213

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 166 of 369
“Question: Is the observance of Sunday as the day of rest a matter clearly laid down in Scripture?

“Answer: It is certainly not; and yet all Protestants consider the observance of this particular day
as essentially necessary to salvation [in this, Keenan is clearly overstating his case. Most
Protestants believe no such thing]. To say we observe the Sunday because Christ rose from the
dead on that day, is to say we act without warrant of Scripture; and we might as well say that we
should rest on Thursday, because Christ ascended to heaven on that day, and rested in reality
from the work of redemption.” Stephen Keenan, The Controversial Catechism, (London: Burns &
Oates, 1896), p. 160.

“Question: Which is the Sabbath day?

“Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.

“Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?

“Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of
Laodicea (336 AD), transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.” Rev. Peter Geiermann,
The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, (St. Louis: B. Herder Book Company, 1957 edition),
p. 50. It is to be noted that this book received the ‘apostolic blessing’ of Pope Pius X on January
25, 1910.

“Protestants often deride the authority of Church tradition, and claim to be directed by the Bible
only; yet they, too, have been guided by the customs of the ancient Church, which find no warrant
in the Bible, but rest on Church tradition only! A striking instance of this is the following: The first
positive command in the Decalogue is to ‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy’, and this
precept was enforced by the Jews for thousands of years. But the Sabbath day, the observance of
which God commanded, was our Saturday. Yet who among either Catholics or Protestants, except
a sect or two, like the ‘Seventh Day Baptists’, ever keep that commandment now? None. Why is
this? The Bible which Protestants claim to obey exclusively, gives no authorization for the
substitution of the first day of the week for the seventh. On what authority, therefore, have they
done so? Plainly on the authority of that very Catholic Church which they abandoned and whose
traditions they condemn.” John L. Stoddard, Rebuilding a Lost Faith (New York: P. J. Kenedy &
Sons, 1922), p. 80

“What Bible authority is there for changing the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the
week? Who gave the Pope authority to change a command of God? If the Bible is the only guide
for the Christian, then the Seventh-day Adventist is right in observing the Saturday with the Jew.
But Catholics learn what to believe and do from the divine, infallible authority established by Jesus
Christ, the Catholic Church, which in Apostolic times made Sunday the day of rest to honor our
Lord’s resurrection on that day and to mark off clearly the Jew from the Christian. St. Justin Martyr
(Apol., c. 67) speaks of the early Christians meeting for the holy sacrifice of the Mass on Sunday.

“Is it not strange that those who make the Bible their only teacher should inconsistently follow in
this matter the tradition of the Church?” Bertrand L. Conway, The Question Box Answers, (New
York: The Columbus Press, 1910), pp. 254, 255. This book has a preface by James Cardinal Gibbons.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 167 of 369
“Because the origin of our faith is not the Bible alone, but the Church which gives us both the
written and the unwritten word.

“So in the New Law, Catholics believe some things not in the Scriptures, although wholly in accord
with them, because of the infallible witness of the Church as to their divine or apostolic origin.
Why do Protestants accept the Scriptures as inspired? Why do they honor the first day of the week
instead of the seventh? Why do they baptize children? Contrary to their principles, they must look
outside the Bible to the voice of tradition, which is not human, but divine, because guaranteed
by the divine, infallible witness of the Catholic Church.” Bertrand Conway, The Question Box
Answers (New York: The Columbus Press, 1910), pp. 75, 76

“The Jews’ Sabbath Day was Saturday; we Christians keep Sunday holy. The Church, by the power
our Lord gave her, changed the observance of the Saturday to the Sunday.

“A word about Sunday. God said: ‘Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day!’ The Sabbath
was Saturday, not Sunday; why, then, do we keep Sunday holy instead of Saturday? The Church
altered the observance of the Sabbath to the observance of Sunday. . . Protestants who say that
they go by the Bible and the Bible only, and that they do not believe anything that is not in the
Bible, must be rather puzzled by the keeping of Sunday when God distinctly said, ‘Keep holy the
Sabbath day.’ The word Sunday does not come anywhere in the Bible so, without knowing it, they
are obeying the authority of the Catholic Church.” H. Canon Cafferata, The Catechism Simply
Explained (London: Burns Oates & Washbourne Ltd., 1938), p. 89.

“One practice we have, which Protestants observe, and there is not a word about it in the Bible—
that is the keeping of Sunday holy.

“The Bible tells us to keep Saturday holy. The change was made by Christian tradition dating back
to the time of the Apostles. But not one of them said a single word about making the change,
when writing the New Testament.” W. Frean ‘Majellan’ Office, (Ballarat, Victoria [Australia]:
Redemptorist Fathers, 1959), p. 88. This book comes with a foreword by His Eminence, Cardinal
Gilroy.

“You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been
changed to Sunday. Changed! But by whom? Who has authority to change an express
commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken, and said, Thou shalt keep holy the
seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business
on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead? This is a most important
question, which I know not how you can answer.

“You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet in so
important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain
letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded.
The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the Ten Commandments; you believe that
the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are
consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to
be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 168 of 369
expressly altered.” Library of Christian Doctrine: Why Don’t You Keep Holy the Sabbath Day?
(London: Burns and Oates), pp. 3, 4

“In the year A. D. 321, the Roman Emperor Constantine decreed that the first day of the week,
Sunday, was to be observed as a civic day of rest from ordinary work and business. That did not
impose any obligations of religious observance upon Christians. But in A. D. 336 the Catholic
Church, at the Council of Laodicea, made the ecclesiastical law obliging the faithful to attend mass
and to abstain from servile work on Sundays.” Dr. Leslie Rumble, Tract titled: Seventh-day
Adventists, pp. 23, 24

“Now the Scriptures alone do not contain all the truths which a Christian is bound to believe, nor
do they explicitly enjoin all the duties which he is obliged to practice. Not to mention other
examples, is not every Christian obliged to sanctify Sunday and to abstain on that day from
unnecessary servile work? Is not the observance of this law among the most prominent of our
sacred duties? You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single
line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of
Saturday, a day which we [Catholics] never sanctify.” James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of Our
Fathers (Baltimore: James Murphy Company, 110th edition revised and enlarged) p. 80

“The word Sabbath means rest, and is Saturday, the seventh day of the week.

“Why then do Christians observe Sunday instead of the day mentioned in the Bible? In order to
make clear to the Jews that they are no longer under the Old Law of Moses, with its requirements
of circumcision, abstinence from certain meat and the scrupulous observance of the Jewish
sacrifice in the Sabbath; but under the New Law of Christ, the infant Church changed the day to
be kept holy from Saturday to Sunday. . .

“The Church received the authority to make such a change from her Founder, Jesus Christ. He
solemnly conferred upon His Church the power to legislate, govern and administer. . . the power
of the keys [we will deal more with this concept when we make our comments on characteristic
#11 of the little horn]. It is to be noted that the Church did not change the divine law obliging
men to worship, but merely changed the day in which such public worship was to be offered; thus
the law involved was merely a ceremonial law.

“But since Saturday, not Sunday, is specified in the Bible, isn’t it curious that non-Catholics who
profess to take their religion directly from the Bible and not from the Church, observe Sunday
instead of Saturday? Yes, of course, it is inconsistent; but this change was made about fifteen
centuries before Protestantism was born, and by that time the custom was universally observed.
They have continued the custom, even though it rests upon the authority of the Catholic Church
and not upon an explicit text in the Bible. That observance remains as a reminder of the Mother
Church from which the non-Catholic sects broke away—like a boy running away from home but
still carrying in his pocket a picture of his mother or a lock of her hair.” John O’Brien, The Faith of
Millions (Huntington, Indiana: Our Sunday Visitor, Inc., 1974) p. 400, 401

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 169 of 369
“Why did the Church change the Lord’s day from the Sabbath to Sunday? The Church, using the
power of binding and loosing which Christ gave to the Pope, changed the Lord’s day to Sunday.”
Killgallen and Weber, Life in Christ: Instructions in the Catholic Faith, p. 243

“It was the Holy Catholic Church that changed the day of rest from Saturday to Sunday, the first
day of the week. And it not only compelled all to keep Sunday, but urged all persons to labor on
the seventh day under pain of anathema. Protestants . . . profess great reverence for the Bible,
and yet by their solumn act of keeping Sunday, they acknowledge the power of the Catholic
Church. The Bible says, ‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.’ But the Catholic Church says,
‘NO: Keep the first day of the week’ and lo, the entire civilized world bows down in reverent
obedience to the command of the holy Catholic church.” Words of Father Enright, longtime
President of Redemptorist College in America, quoted in, Joe Crews, The Beast, the Dragon and
the Woman (Frederick, Maryland: Amazing Facts, Inc., thirteenth edition, June 1991), p. 33.

“Nothing is said in the Bible about the change of the Lord’s day from Saturday to Sunday. We
know of the change only from the tradition of the Church—a fact handed down to us from the
earliest times by the living voice of the Church. That is why we find so illogical the attitude of
many non-Catholics, who say that they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the Bible and
yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord’s day on the sayBso of the Catholic Church.” Rev.
Leo J. Trese and John J. Castletot, S. S., Salvation History and the Commandments (1963 edition),
p. 294

“Ten precepts. . . . embodying the revealed expression of the Creator’s will in relation to man’s
whole duty to God and to his fellow creatures. . . . Christ resumed these Commandments in the
double precept of charity—love of God and of the neighbor; He proclaimed them as binding under
the New Law in Matthew 19 and in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5) . . . . The Church, on
the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the
week, to the first, made the third commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the
Lord’s Day.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, article, ‘The Commandments of God’.

“Q. What day was the Sabbath?

“A. The seventh day, our Saturday
“Q. Do you keep the Sabbath?
“A. No: we keep the Lord’s Day.
“Q. Which is that?
“A. The first day: Sunday.
“Q. Who changed it?
“A. The Catholic Church” James Bellord, A New Catechism of Christian Doctrine, pp. 86, 87.

“Q. Has the [Roman Catholic] Church a power to make any alterations in the commandments of
God?

A . . . Instead of the seventh day, and other festivals appointed by the old law, the Church has
prescribed the Sundays and holidays to be set apart for God’s worship: and these we are now

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 170 of 369
obliged to keep in consequence of God’s commandment, instead of the ancient Sabbath.” Richard
Challoner, The Catholic Christian Instructed, p. 211
“There is not a word in the Gospels about changing the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday.
Up to the time of the establishment of the Church of Christ, the day of worship was Saturday
which in Hebrew is Sabbath. The Christian day of worship is Sunday, not Saturday. We call Sunday
the Sabbath sometimes, because that was the established name for the day of worship in the Old
Testament. To change the day of worship was a momentous thing for the new Church to do.
Unless it was by the authority of God it would not and could not have been done. Yet, there is no
special authorization for this change in Scripture. Those who affirm that the Bible is the sole rule
of Faith, should leave off Sunday church-going and worship on the Sabbath, as the Jews do to this
day, and as the Old Testament ordains.

“None but God could authorize the abolition of an ordination made by God Himself. It was God
who commanded: ‘Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day’ (Exodus 20:8). The Church of
Christ abolished Sabbath worship because she received authorization from Him who proclaimed
the Ten Commandments. Christ said of His Church: ‘He that heareth you heareth Me’ (Luke 10:16).
That was a tremendous power for the Creator to delegate to a creature. But in giving the power
Christ had also promised the dwelling of the Holy Ghost with His Church, which was to make it
immune to error.

“Not only did the Church institute Sunday as the day of special public worship, but she also
abolished many other rites and ceremonies prescribed by the Old Testament.” Martin J. Scott, S.
J., Christ’s Own Church, pp. 44, 45.

“The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue
of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday. We say by virtue of her divine
mission, because he who called himself the ‘Lord of the Sabbath,’ endowed her with his own
power to teach, ‘he that heareth you, heareth me;’ commanded all who believe in him to hear her
under penalty of being placed with the ‘heathen and publican;’ and promised to be with her to
the end of the world. She holds her charter as teacher from him—a charter as infallible as
perpetual. The Protestant world at its birth [in the Reformation of the sixteenth century] found
the Christian Sabbath too strongly intrenched to run counter to its existence; it was therefore
placed under the necessity of acquiescing in the arrangement, thus implying the church’s right to
change the day, for over three hundred years. The Christian Sabbath is therefore to this day, the
acknowledged offspring of the Catholic Church as spouse of the Holy Ghost, without a word of
remonstrance from the Protestant world.” The Catholic Mirror (Baltimore, September 23, 1893)
The Mirror was the official organ of Cardinal Gibbons and the article from which this is taken was
one of a series of four, printed September 2, 9, 16 and 23, 1893, under the general heading: ‘The
Christian Sabbath: the Genuine Offspring of the Union of the Holy Spirit and the Catholic Church
His Spouse. The Claims of Protestantism to Any Part Therein Proved to be Groundless, Self-
contradictory, and Suicidal.’ These articles were subsequently printed by the Mirror as a tract.
The Mirror was discontinued in 1908, and five years later was succeeded by the Catholic Review,
which is now the organ of the archdiocese of Baltimore.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 171 of 369
“By what authority did the Church change the observance of the Sabbath from Saturday to
Sunday?

“The Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible
authority given to her by her Founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant, claiming the Bible to be the
only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday. In this matter the Seventh-day Adventist
is the only consistent Protestant. Sunday as the day of rest to honor our Lord’s resurrection dates
to Apostolic times and was so established among other reasons, to mark off the Jew from the
Christian. St. Justin the Martyr speaks of it in his Apologies.” The Catholic Universe Bulletin, ‘The
Question Box,’ (Volume 69, August 14, 1942), p. 4.

“Q. (a) The Bible says ‘The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord,’ and we read in your literature
that it is the only Bible Sabbath there is. Will you please explain how the Sunday observance
originated? (b) Do you think the Seventh Day Adventists keep the right day?

“A. (a) If you follow the Bible alone there can be no question that you are obliged to keep Saturday
holy, since that is the day especially prescribed by Almighty God to be kept holy to the Lord. In
keeping Sunday, non-Catholics are simply following the practice of the Catholic Church for 1800
years, a tradition, and not a Bible ordinance. What we would like to know is: Since they deny the
authority of the Church, on what grounds can they base their faith of keeping Sunday. Those who
keep Saturday, like the Seventh Day Adventists, unquestionably have them by the hip in this
practice. And they cannot give them any sufficient answer which would satisfy an unprejudiced
mind. With the Catholics there is no difficulty about the matter. For, since we deny that the Bible
is the sole rule of faith, we can fall back upon the constant practice and tradition of the Church
which, long before the reign of Constantine, even in the very days of the apostles themselves,
were accustomed to keep the first day of the week instead of the last.” F. G. Lentz, The Question
Box (New York: Christian Press Association, 1900), pp. 98, 99

“All of us believe many things in regard to religion that we do not find in the Bible. For example,
nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christ or the Apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed
from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the
Sabbath Day, that is the 7th day of the week, Saturday. Today most Christians keep Sunday
because it has been revealed to us by the Church outside the Bible.” The Catholic Virginian, ‘To
Tell You the Truth,' volume 22 (October 3, 1947)

“I am going to propose a very plain and serious question, to which I would entreat all who profess
to follow ‘the Bible and the Bible only’ to give their most earnest attention. It is this: Why do you
not keep holy the Sabbath day?

“You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been
changed to Sunday. Changed! but by whom? Who has authority to change an express
commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, Thou shalt keep holy the
seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business
on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead? This is a most important
question, which I know not how you can answer.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 172 of 369
“You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet in so
important a matter as the observance of one day in seven as a holy day, you go against the plain
letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded.
The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the Ten Commandments; you believe that
the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are
consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible and the Bible only, you ought to
be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is
expressly altered, or at least from which you may confidently infer that it was the will of God that
Christians should make that change in its observance which you have made.” The Clifton Tracts,
‘Why Don’t You Keep Holy the Sabbath Day?’ (New York: T. W. Strong, volume 4, 1869), pp. 3-15)

“The fact, however, that Christ until His death, and His Apostles at least for a time after Christ’s
Ascension, observed the Sabbath is evidence enough that our Lord Himself did not substitute the
Lord’s Day for the Sabbath, during His lifetime on earth. Instead, as most agree, He simply gave
His Church the power to determine the days to be set aside for the special worship of God. . . It is
easy to surmise that this preference of Christ for the first day of the week greatly influenced the
Apostles and the early Christians to keep that day holy, and eventually moved them to make a
complete substitution of the Sabbath for Sunday. There is no conclusive evidence, however, that
the Apostles made this change of days by a definite decree.” Vincent J. Kelly, Forbidden Sunday
and Feast-Day Occupations, copyright 1943, pp. 19, 20

“Like two sacred rivers flowing from Paradise, the Bible and divine tradition contain the word of
God, the precious gems of revealed truths. Though these two divine streams are in themselves,
on account of their divine origin, of equal sacredness, and are both full of revealed truths, still, of
the two, tradition is to us more clear and safe.” Joseph Faa di Bruno, Catholic Belief, p. 45.

“But the Church of God has thought it well to transfer the celebration and observance of the
Sabbath to Sunday, or, as on that day light first shone on the world, so by the Resurrection of our
Redeemer on the same day, by whom was thrown open to us the gate to eternal life, we were
called out of darkness into light; and hence the Apostles would have it called the Lord’s day.

“We also learn from the Sacred Scriptures that the first day of the week was held sacred because
on that day the work of creation commenced and on that day the Holy Ghost was given to the
Apostles.” Translation by John A. McHugh and Charles J. Callan (1958), Catechism of the Council
of Trent for Parish Priests, (New York: Joseph F. Wagner, Inc., 1934), pp. 402, 403

“Sunday . . . is purely a creation of the Catholic Church. . . .

“For ages all Christian nations looked to the Catholic Church, and, as we have seen, the various
states enforced by law her ordinances as to worship and cessation of labor on Sunday.
Protestantism, in discarding the authority of the Church, has no good reason for its Sunday theory,
and ought, logically, to keep Saturday as the Sabbath.” John Gilmary Shea, ‘The Observance of
Sunday and Civil Laws for its Enforcement,’ in, The American Catholic Quarterly Review, volume
8 (January 1893), pp. 139, 152

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 173 of 369
A. The Third Commandment
Q. What does the word ‘Sabbath’ mean?
A. It means the day of rest
Q. When did the Sabbath begin to be kept?
A. From the very creation of the world; for then ‘God blessed the seventh day, and rested on it
from all His work.’ Gen. 2:2, 3
Q. When was this Commandment renewed?
A. In the Old Law, when God gave the commandments to Moses on Mount Sinai, written with His
own finger on two tables of stone. Exodus 20
Q. Why was the Jewish Sabbath changed into Sunday?
A. Because Christ was born on a Sunday, arose from the dead on a Sunday, and sent down the
Holy Ghost on a Sunday—works not inferior to the creation of the world.
Q. By whom was it changed?
A. By the Governors of the Church, the Apostles, who also kept it; for St. John was in the spirit on
the Lord’s day (which was Sunday) Apoc. 1:10
Q. How do you prove that the Church has power to command Feasts and Holy-days?
A. By this very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which is admitted by Protestants, and
therefore contradict themselves by keeping Sunday so strictly, and breaking most other Feasts
commanded by the same Church.
Q. How do you prove that?
A. Because by keeping Sunday they acknowledge the power of the Church to ordain Feasts and to
command them under sin, and by not keeping the remainder, equally commanded by her, they
deny in fact the same power.” Daniel Ferris, Manual of Christian Doctrine: or, Catholic Belief
and Practice (Dublin: M. H. Gill & Son, Ltd., 1916), pp. 67, 68

Let us now examine two statements from church historians on the change of the Sabbath:

“The festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance, and it was far
from the intentions of the apostles to establish a divine command in this respect, far from them,
and from the early apostolic church, to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday.” Augustus
Neander, The History of the Christian Religion and Church, translated by Henry John Rose, p. 186

“Thus do we see upon what grounds the Lord’s day stands; on custom first, and voluntary
consecration of it to religious meetings: that custom countenanced by the authority of the church
of God, which tacitly approved the same; and finally confirmed and ratified by Christian princes
throughout their empires.” Peter Heylyn, The History of the Sabbath, part 2, chapter 3, section
12.

Though we are dealing with Roman Catholic statements on the change of the Sabbath, perhaps
it would be good to offer a few representative statements from the pen of Protestant expositors
as well. We will begin with Isaac Williams:
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 174 of 369
“Where are we told in Scripture that we are to keep the first day at all? We are commanded to
keep the seventh; but we are nowhere commanded to keep the first day. . . . The reason why we
keep the first day of the week holy instead of the seventh is for the same reason that we observe
many other things, not because of the Bible, but because the church, has enjoined it.” Isaac
Williams, Plain Sermons on the Catechism, volume I, pp. 334-336

“The day called Sabbath by both Jewish and Christian writers is not Sunday, but the day
previousBthat is, Saturday. There is no indication whatever that the apostles in any sense
substituted the Christian Sunday [a misnomer and oxymoron to be sure] for the Jewish Sabbath;
no trace of any such transference is to be found in history. And there is nothing in Holy Scripture
or in early Christian history to identify Sunday with the Sabbath, or to make the fourth
commandment a mere precept for the observance of Sunday.” Vernon Staley, The Seasons, Fasts
and Festivals of the Christian Year, p. 54
“The reason why we observe the first day instead of the seventh is based on no positive command.
One will search the Scriptures in vain for authority for changing from the seventh day to the first.”
Clovis G. Chappell, The Rules for Living, p. 61

“The Sabbath was founded on a specific divine command. We can plead no such command for
the obligation to observe Sunday.” R. W. Dale, The Ten Commandments, p. 100

“Jesus, after his resurrection, changed the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week;
thus showing his authority as Lord even of the Sabbath. (Mathew. xii, 8) Not to abrogate or break
it, but to preside over and modify, or give new form to it, so as to have it commemorate his
resurrection, when he ceased from his redeeming work as God did from his creation work.
Hebrews 4:10”

“When Jesus gave instructions for this change we are not told, but very likely during the time
when he spake to his apostles of the things pertaining to is kingdom. (Acts 1:3) This is probably
one of the many unrecorded things which Jesus did. (John 20:30; 21:25)” Amos Binney and Daniel
Steele, Theological Compend (New York: The Methodist Book Concern, 1902), p. 171.

Does such a statement from an avowed Protestant really merit a reply? Where is the Biblical
proof for his statement?

Notice the following astounding statement by Dr. Edward T. Hiscox, author of the Baptist
Manual:

“There was and is a commandment to keep holy the Sabbath day, but that Sabbath day was not
Sunday. It will be said, however, and with some show of triumph, that the Sabbath was
transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week, with all its duties, privileges and
sanctions. Earnestly desiring information on this subject, which I studied for many years, I ask:
Where can the record of such a transaction be found? Not in the New Testament, absolutely not.
There is no Scriptural evidence of the change of the Sabbath institution from the seventh to the
first day of the week.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 175 of 369
“I wish to say that this Sabbath question, in this aspect of it, is the gravest and most perplexing
question connected with Christian institutions which at present claims attention from Christian
people; and the only reason that it is not a more disturbing element in Christian thought and in
religious discussions, is because the Christian world has settled down content on the conviction
that somehow a transference has taken place at the beginning of Christian history. . . .

“To me it seems unaccountable that Jesus, during three years’ intercourse with his disciples, often
conversing with them upon the Sabbath question, discussing it in some of its various aspects,
freeing it from its false glosses, never alluded to any transference of the day; also, that during
forty days of his resurrection life, no such thing was intimated. Nor, so far as we know, did the
Spirit, which was given to bring to their remembrance all things whatsoever that he had said unto
them, deal with this question. Nor yet did the inspired apostles, in preaching the gospel, founding
churches, counseling and instructing those founded, discuss or approach this subject.”

“Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious
day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a pity that it comes
branded with the mark of paganism, and christened with the name of the sun-god, when adopted
and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism.”
From a speech given before the New York Ministers’ Conference, November 13, 1893

Philipp Melanchthon, the close colleague of Martin Luther, seems to have been the first to
directly connect the change of the Law in Daniel 7:25 with the work of the Papacy:

“He changeth the times and laws that any of the six work days commanded of God will make
them unholy and idle days when he list, or of their own holy days abolished make work days again,
or when they changed the Saturday into Sunday. . . They have changed God’s laws and turned
them into their own traditions to be kept above God’s precepts.” Quoted by George Joye, in
Exposition of Daniel the Prophet, 1545, p. 110
Reputable church historians recognize the connection between the Sunday which Christians
observe and the ancient pagan day of the Sun. Let’s quote a few:

“Sunday (dies solis . . .’day of the sun,’ because dedicated to the sun), the first day of the week,
was adopted by the early Christians as a day of worship. The ‘sun’ of Latin adoration they
interpreted as the ‘Sun of Righteousness.’ . . . . No regulations for its observance are laid down in
the New Testament, nor, indeed, is its observance even enjoined.” The Schaff-Herzog
Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, volume 4, article, ‘Sunday,’
third edition, 1891), p. 2259

“The early Christians had at first adopted the Jewish seven-day week, with its numbered week
days, but by the close of the third century A. D. this began to give way to the planetary week; and
in the fourth and fifth centuries the pagan designations became generally accepted in the western
half of Christendom. The use of the planetary names by Christians attests the growing influence
of astrological speculations introduced by converts from paganism. . . . During these same
centuries the spread of Oriental solar worship, especially that of Mithra, in the Roman world, had
already led to the substitution by pagans of dies solis for dies Saturni, as the first day of the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 176 of 369
planetary week. . . . Thus gradually a pagan institution was ingrafted on Christianity.” Hutton
Webster, Ph. D., Rest Days (New York: Macmillan & Co., 1916), pp. 220, 221.

“It is not necessary to go into a subject which the diligence of Protestant writers has made familiar
to most of us. The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints; . . . holy water;
asylums; holy days and seasons, use of calendars, processions . . . are all of pagan origin, and
sanctified by their adoption into the church.” John Henry Cardinal Newman, The Development of
Christian Doctrine (London: Longmans, Green, & Co., 1906), p. 373

“The first day of the week, named after the sun, and therefore an evident relic of sun worship. In
French it is Dimanche, in Italian Dominica, both from Dominus, ‘the Lord.’ Christians, with the
exception of Seventh-day Adventists, have substituted it as a day of rest and prayer in lieu of the
Jewish Sabbath.” William S. Walsh, Curiosities of Popular Customs, article, ‘Sunday,’
(Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company, 1898), p. 901

“The Gentiles were an idolatrous people who worshiped the sun, and Sunday was their most
sacred day. Now, in order to reach the people in this new field, it seems but natural, as well as
necessary, to make Sunday the rest day of the Church. At this time it was necessary for the Church
to either adopt the Gentiles’ day or else have the Gentiles change their day. To change the
Gentiles’ day would have been an offense and stumbling block to them. The Church could
naturally reach them better by keeping their day.” Dr. William Frederick, Sunday and the
Christian Sabbath, pp. 169, 170

“The Church made a sacred day of Sunday . . . largely because it was the weekly festival of the
sun; for it was a definite Christian policy to take over the pagan festivals endeared to the people
by tradition, and to give them a Christian significance.” Arthur Weigall, The Paganism in Our
Christianity (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, copyright in 1928), p. 145

Notice the following fourth century challenge written by the pagan, Faustus, to the Christian, St.
Augustine:

“You celebrate the solemn festivals of the Gentiles, their calendars and their solstices; and as to
their manners, those you have retained without any alterations. Nothing distinguishes you from
the pagans except that you hold your assemblies apart from them.” Cited in John William Draper,
History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, volume I, (New York: Harper & Brothers,
1876), p. 310

Recently, Pope John Paul II has made a valiant attempt to justify the observance of Sunday on
Biblical grounds. In this ecumenical age, when John Paul has called upon Protestants to become
one with the Roman Catholic Church, it would not be popular to accuse Protestants of keeping
Sunday in honor of the Papacy. For this reason, John Paul tones down the ‘tradition rhetoric’ and
does his best to provide Biblical evidence for the change. However, a careful reading of his
pastoral letter, Dies Domini, betrays his dependence on oral tradition as the main justification for
the observance of Sunday. In the letter, he quotes church tradition and theologians 212 times!
Without going into a full analysis of this pastoral letter, I would like to submit five places where
John Paul clearly betrays this dependence on tradition:
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 177 of 369
Paragraph 6 John Paul II clearly states that Sunday is the Church’s precept:

“Given this array of new situations and the questions which they prompt, it seems more necessary
than ever to recover the deep doctrinal foundations underlying the Church’s precept, so that the
abiding value of Sunday in the Christian life will be clear to all the faithful.”

In Paragraph 18 John Paul attributes the change to Christians:

“Because the Third Commandment depends upon the remembrance of God’s saving works and
because Christians saw the definitive time inaugurated by Christ as a new beginning, they made
the first day after the Sabbath a festive day, for that was the day on which the Lord rose from the
dead.”

Paragraph 27: John Paul attributes Sunday observance as resulting from Christian reflection and
pastoral practice and wise pastoral intuition.

“This Christocentric vision sheds light upon another symbolism which Christian reflection and
pastoral practice ascribed to the Lord’s Day. Wise pastoral intuition suggested to the Church the
christianization of the notion of Sunday as ‘the day of the sun’. . . .”

Paragraph 63: John Paul once again attributes the change to Christians, not to Christ!!

“This is why Christians, called as they are to proclaim the liberation won by the blood of Christ,
felt that they had the authority to transfer the meaning of the Sabbath to the day of the
Resurrection.”

Paragraph 81: In this statement John Paul, without apology or qualification, attributes the ‘riches’
of Sunday observance to tradition:

“The spiritual and pastoral riches of Sunday as it has been handed down to us by tradition, are
truly great.”

In short, these five statements clearly show that the change was made by the church and not by
Christ or the Apostles!

I would like to provide two statements from Roman Catholic sources, where the claim is made
that Sunday is a sign or mark of the authority of the Church:

“The Divine institution of a day of rest from ordinary occupations and of religious worship,
transferred by the authority of the Church from the Sabbath, the last day, to Sunday, the first day
of the week, . . . is one of the most patent signs that we are a Christian people.” James Cardinal
Gibbons, as quoted in, John Gilmary Shea and others, The Cross and the Flag, ‘The Claims of the
Catholic Church in the Making of the Republic,’ (New York: The Catholic Historical Leage of
America, 1899), pp. 24, 25
In 1895, J. F. Snyder, of Bloomington, Illinois, wrote to Cardinal Gibbons asking the following
question:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 178 of 369
“Does the Roman Catholic Church claim the act of changing the observance of the Sabbath from
the seventh to the first day of the week as a mark of her power?”

Cardinal Gibbons answered through his Chancellor, H. F. Thomas:

“Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. It could not have been
otherwise, as none in those days would have dreamed of doing anything in matters spiritual and
ecclesiastical and religious without her. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and
authority in religious matters.” Signed by Chancellor H. F. Thomas, November 11, 1895
It is of more than passing interest that the Roman Catholic Church has a special fascination with
the sun. It probably would be better to call it an obsession. As one visits Roman Catholic
Cathedrals in various countries of the world one is struck by the frequent icons, statues and
paintings with sun-bursts. In St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, there is a huge sun-burst in the front
which ‘jumps out’ at the observer the moment one walks in. In the Vatican Museum there are
literally thousands of sun-bursts everywhere one looks.

Most Roman Catholic believers are probably not aware that the round wafer used in the Eucharist
is a solar symbol. When the Roman Catholic faithful worship the host [wafer], they think they are
worshiping Christ when in reality they are worshiping the sun!! The round tonsure on the head
of the Roman Catholic priests is also a representation of the fact that they are priests of the sun-
god. Roman Catholic altars are constantly adorned with a sun-burst on the front side. The place
where the host is kept is invariably adorned with the sun. This obsession with the sun can be
traced directly to ancient Roman paganism. In fact, as Bacchiocchi has irrefutably shown, the
observance of the Sunday came into the Christian Church from paganism.

One final confirmatory statement from the pen of Ellen G. White:

“The special characteristic of the beast, and therefore of his image, is the breaking of God’s
commandments. Says Daniel, of the little horn, the papacy: ‘He shall think to change the times
and the law.’ Dan. 7:25, Revised Version. And Paul styled the same power the ‘man of sin’ who
was to exalt himself above God. One prophecy is a complement of the other. Only by changing
God’s law could the papacy exalt itself above God. And whoever should understandingly keep the
law as thus changed would be giving supreme honor to that power by which the change was
made. Such an act of obedience to papal laws would be a mark of allegiance to the pope in the
place of God.” The Great Controversy, p. 446
Characteristic #9:

We shall now see that the Roman Catholic Church is a different power than the kingdoms which
came before her. The fundamental difference lies in the fact that the Papacy is an amalgamation
of church and state.

We will begin with a quotation from the pen of Malachi Martin, Jesuit theologian, who describes
the relationship between Constantine and Pope Sylvester after the Edict of Milan in 313:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 179 of 369
“All anti-church laws will be revoked. Constantine abolishes crucifixion as the supreme capital
punishment—no criminal should die in the same way as Jesus the Christ died for men’s sins.
Sunday will be a public holiday in honor of Jesus’ resurrection. Throughout the West, Constantine
decides, he will use the bishops of the church just as former Roman emperors used the pontiffs of
the old Roman College of Pontiffs, with the pope being supreme pontiff. All local bishops will have
civil jurisdiction. Pope Sylvester and his successors will have supreme civil jurisdiction over all
localities in the western half of the Roman Empire. . . .These two men, the pope and the emperor,
have now set the stage for the next 1,600 years. The Church of Rome will always be allied with
some temporal power. At one stage, it will even claim to be the source of all worldly
powerBpolitical, civil, military, diplomatic, financial, cultural. And it will make that claim stick for
quite some time. But what a price it will pay!” (Malachi Martin, The Decline and Fall of the Roman
Church, p. 37)

Martin is not alone in his assessment. Other church historians have clearly written about this
church/state alliance which began in the days of Constantine. Notice the words of James Conroy:

“Long ages ago, when Rome through the neglect of the Western emperors was left to the mercy
of the barbarous hordes, the Romans turned to one figure for aid and protection, and asked him
to rule them; and thus, in this simple manner, the best title of all to kingly right, commenced the
temporal sovereignty of the popes. And meekly stepping to the throne of Caesar, the vicar of
Christ took up the scepter to which the emperors and kings of Europe were to bow in reverence
through so many ages.” James P. Conroy, American Quarterly Catholic Quarterly Review, April,
1911.

Cardinal Henry Edward Manning, writing about the papacy’s emancipation from the power of the
state in the days of Constantine, states:

“But from the hour when Constantine, in the language of the Roman law, Deo jubente, by the
command of God, translated the seat of the empire to Constantinople, from that moment there
never reigned in Rome a temporal prince to whom the Bishops of Rome owed a permanent
allegiance. From that hour God Himself liberated His Church. It was from the first involved in the
principles of the supernatural sovereignty of the Church on earth, that it should be one day free
from all temporal allegiance, though as yet its liberation was not accomplished. . . It [the papacy]
waited until such a time as God should break its bonds asunder, and should liberate it from
subjection to civil powers [in the words of the apostle Paul, the ‘restrainer’ was ‘taken out of the
way’], and enthrone it in the possession of a temporal sovereignty of its own.” Henry Edward
Manning, The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christ (London: Burns & Lambert, second
edition, 1862), pp. 11-13. Emphasis supplied

Alexander Clarence Flick echoes the same idea in the following quotation:

“The removal of the capital of the Empire from Rome to Constantinople in 330 left the Western
Church, practically free from imperial power, to develop its own form of organization. The Bishop
of Rome, in the seat of the Caesars was now the greatest man in the West, and was soon forced
to become the political as well as the spiritual head. To the Western world Rome was still the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 180 of 369
political capitalBhence the whole habit of mind, all ambition, pride, and sense of glory, and every
social prejudice favored the evolution of the great city into the ecclesiastical capital. Civil as well
as religious disputes were referred to the successor of Peter for settlement. Again and again,
when barbarians attacked Rome, he was compelled to actually assume military leadership.
Eastern Emperors frequently recognized the high claims of the Popes in order to gain their
assistance. It is not difficult to understand how, under these responsibilities, the primacy of the
Bishop of Rome, established in the pre-Constantine period, was emphasized and magnified after
313 [Edict of Milan].” Alexander Clarence Flick, The Rise of the Mediaeval Church (New York:
Reprinted by Burt Franklin, 1959), pp. 168, 169 Emphasis supplied

And Carl Conrad Eckhardt has stated:

“Under the Roman Empire the popes had no temporal powers [the dragon stage]. But when the
Roman Empire had disintegrated [the ten horns stage] and its place had been taken by a number
of rude, barbarous kingdoms, the Roman Catholic church [the little horn stage] not only became
independent of the states in religious affairs but dominated secular affairs as well. At times,
under such rulers as Charlemagne (768-814), Otto the Great (936-73), and Henry III (1039-56),
the civil power controlled the church to some extent; but in general, under the weak political
system of feudalism, the well-organized, unified, and centralized church, with the pope as its
head, was not only independent in ecclesiastical affairs but also controlled the civil affairs. The
church interfered in secular affairs on the basis of its theory of the relation of church and state,
which was formulated in substance by Augustine (354-430) and given wider and more definite
application by such popes as Gregory VII (1073-85), Innocent III (1198-1216), Boniface VIII (1294-
1303), and others.” Carl Conrad Eckhardt, The Papacy and World Affairs (Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1937), p. 1, emphasis supplied

This early view eventually morphed into the blasphemous claims of later popes. For example,
here are the words of Pope Nicholas I who ruled from 858 through 867:
“It is evident that the popes can neither be bound nor unbound by any earthly power, nor even by
that of the apostle [Peter], if he should return upon the earth; since Constantine the Great has
recognized that the pontiffs held the place of God upon earth, the divinity not being able to be
judged by any living man. We are, then, infallible, and whatever may be our acts, we are not
accountable for them but to ourselves.” (Quoted in, R. W. Thompson, The Papacy and the Civil
Power (New York, 1876), p. 248.
And once again, Nicholas blasphemously boasted:

“Fear, then, our wrath and the thunders of our vengeance; for Jesus Christ has appointed us [the
popes] with his own mouth absolute judges of all men; and kings themselves are submitted to our
authority.” (Quoted in, Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, p. 228)

The controversy between Henry IV, emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (technically he was king
of Germany though he claimed to be Holy Roman Emperor), and Pope Gregory VII is legendary.
Gregory VII decided to enforce strict laws forbidding simony (buying and selling church offices)
and marriage of the clergy. This meant that clergy with wives were required to put them away

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 181 of 369
and the children had to be disowned. Henry rebelled against Gregory and wrote him the following
stinging words:
“Henry, King not by usurpation, but through holy ordination of God, to Hildebrand, at present not
Pope but false monk. This is the salutation you deserve, for you have never held any office in the
Church without making it a source of confusion and a curse to Christian men, instead of an honor
and a blessing.”

The letter ended with the following stinging words:

“I, Henry, King by the grace of God, do say unto thee: ‘Come down, come down, and be damned
through all the ages.’” (Quoted in, Louis L. Snyder, ed., Documents of German History (New
Brunswick, N. J.: Rutgers University Press, 1958), pp. 31-33

This challenge could not go unanswered so Gregory VII promptly excommunicated Henry and
placed his realm under interdict [basically, in the view of the day, this doomed the whole
population to eternal condemnation in hell because churches were closed and the sacraments
could not be received]. Gregory’s letter in the form of a prayer addressed to the apostle Peter
invokes the curse of the apostle upon the rebellious king. The letter stated in part:

“St. Peter, prince of the apostles, incline thine ear unto me, I beseech thee, and hear me, thy
servant, whom thou hast nourished from mine infancy and hast delivered from mine enemies that
hate me for my fidelity to thee. Thou art my witness, as are also my mistress, the mother of God,
and St. Paul thy brother and all the other saints, that thy holy Roman church called me to its
government against my own will, and that I did not gain thy throne with violence; that I would
rather have ended my days in exile than have obtained thy place by fraud or for worldly ambition.
It is not by my efforts, but by thy grace, that I am set to rule over the Christian world which was
especially intrusted to thee by Christ. It is by thy grace and as thy representative that God has
given me the power to bind and to loose in heaven and in earth. Confident of my integrity and
authority, I now declare in the name of omnipotent God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, that
Henry, son of the emperor Henry, is deprived of his kingdom of Germany and Italy; I do this by thy
authority and in defense of the honor of thy church, because he has rebelled against it. He who
attempts to destroy the honor of the church should be deprived of such honor as he may have
held. He has refused to obey as a Christian should, he has not returned to God from whom he had
wandered, he has had dealings with excommunicated persons, he has done many iniquities, he
has despised the warnings which, as thou art witness, I sent to him for his salvation, he has cut
himself off from thy church, and has attempted to rend it asunder; therefore, by thy authority, I
place him under the curse. It is in thy name that I curse him that all people may know that thou
art Peter, and upon thy rock the Son of the living God has built his church, and the gates of hell
shall not prevail against it. . . .” Quoted in, Oliver J. Thatcher and Edgar Holmes McNeal, eds., A
Source Book for Mediaeval History (New York: Scribner’s Sons, 1905), pp. 146, 155-159)
Henry already had many enemies among the nobility in Germany. These were envious of his
position and resented his power so they took advantage of this opportunity to turn the people
against Henry. The clamor of the people and the opposition of the nobles soon became

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 182 of 369
unbearable. Henry heard that Gregory VII was on his way to Germany. Fearing that he would be
permanently deposed if the pope came to Germany and sat with his rebellious subjects in
judgment on him, Henry agreed to go to Canossa, Italy and beg for Gregory’s forgiveness. Henry
arrived in Canossa in January of 1077. Though it was the dead of winter, Gregory forced Henry to
stand in the freezing cold for three days and three nights barefoot and clad only in wretched
woolen garments. Remarks one historian:

“The spectacle of the mightiest king in Christendom humbling himself in this sensational fashion
was one to amaze the whole Christian world—king, lord, and peasant alike.” (Oliver J. Thatcher
and Edgar Holmes McNeal, eds., A Source Book for Mediaeval History (New York: Scribner’s and
Sons, 1905), pp. 146, 155-159.

After the three days, Gregory absolved Henry, removed the interdict and wrote a letter to the
nobles of Germany:

“Gregory, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to all the archbishops, bishops, dukes, counts,
and other princes of the German kingdom, defenders of the Christian faith, greeting and apostolic
benediction.

“Since you have made common cause with us and shared our perils in the recent controversy, we
have thought it only right that you should be informed of the recent course of events, how King
Henry came to Italy to do penance, and how we were led to grant him absolution.

“According to the agreement made with your representatives we had come to Lombardy and
were there awaiting those whom you were to send to escort us into your land. But after the time
set was already passed, we received word that it was at that time impossible to send an escort,
because of many obstacles that stood in the way, and we were greatly exercised at this and in
grave doubt as to what we ought to do. In the meantime we learned that the king was
approaching. Now before he entered Italy he had sent to us and had offered to make complete
satisfaction for his fault, promising to reform and henceforth to obey us in all things, provided
we would give him our absolution and blessing. We hesitated for some time, taking occasion in
the course of the negotiations to reprove him sharply for his former sins. Finally he came in person
to Canossa, here we were staying, bringing with him only a small retinue and manifesting no
hostile intentions. Once arrived, he presented himself at the gate of the castle, barefoot and clad
only in wretched woolen garments, beseeching us with tears to grant him absolution and
forgiveness. This he continued to do for three days, until all those about us were moved to
compassion at his plight and interceded for him with tears and prayers. Indeed, they marveled at
our hardness of heart, some even complaining that our action savored rather of heartless tyranny
than of chastening severity. At length his persistent declarations of repentance and supplications
of all who were there with us overcame our reluctance, and we removed the excommunication
from him and received him again into the bosom of the holy mother church.” (Quoted in Oliver J.
Thatcher and Edgar Holmes McNeal, eds., A Source Book for Mediaeval History (New York:
Scribner’s and Sons, 1905), pp. 155-159.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 183 of 369
Besides begging forgiveness of Gregory, Henry agreed to submit to the authority of Gregory VII
in all things. He also called upon his subjects to submit to the pope’s authority and rescinded the
edicts whereby he had deposed Gregory. This whole episode is remarkable. By crossing the Alps
in the dead of winter and standing outside the castle at Canossa in the cold for three days waiting
for an audience with Gregory VII, Henry was admitting that the Pope was the lord of kings. Even
though Henry was king of Germany, the whole of Europe was really under his control because he
was Holy Roman Emperor. By humbling himself, Henry was thus admitting that the pope was
sovereign over all the kings of Europe.
Pope Alexander III (1159-81) also wielded enormous power over Frederick I, Holy Roman
Emperor and king of Germany and Italy. Frederick’s attempt to chastise the pope backfired when
his armies were defeated by the papal forces. For his rebellion, Frederick was promptly
excommunicated and deposed by the pope. In penitence and humiliation, the emperor had to
travel to Venice to beg for Alexander’s forgiveness and absolution. The scene is described by
Roman Catholic historian, Fortunatus Ulmas:

“When the emperor arrived in the presence of the pope, he laid aside his imperial mantle, and
knelt on both knees, with his breast on the earth. Alexander advanced and placed his foot on his
neck, while the cardinals thundered forth in loud tones, ‘Thou shalt tread upon the cockatrice, and
crush the lion and the dragon. . .’ The next day Frederick Barbarossa. . . . kissed the feet of
Alexander, and, on foot, led his horse by the bridle as he returned from solemn mass, to the
pontifical palace. . . . The papacy had now risen to a height of grandeur and power which it had
never reached before. The sword of Peter had conquered the sword of Caesar!” Quoted in Dave
Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, pp. 29-30). Emphasis supplied

Another pope who wielded gigantic power over kings and princes was Innocent III (1198-1216).
Notice the analogy Innocent provided to justify the dominion of the church over the state:

“The Creator of the universe set up two great luminaries in the firmament of heaven; the greater
light to rule the day, the lesser light to rule the night. In the same way for the firmament of the
universal Church, which is spoken of as heaven, he appointed two great dignitaries; the greater
to bear rule over souls . . . the lesser to bear rule over bodies. . . These dignitaries are the pontifical
authority and the royal power. Furthermore, the moon derives her light from the sun, and is in
truth inferior to the sun in both size and quality, in position as well as effect. In the same way, the
royal power derives its dignity from the pontifical authority.” Henry Bettenson, Documents of the
Christian Church, p. 158)

In the year 1302 pope Boniface VIII proclaimed a very significant bull (personal letter) bearing the
name, Unam Sanctam. In it, Boniface refined the idea of the two swords which had originally
been proposed by St. Bernard. We will quote only the portions of the bull which are apropos to
the subject we are dealing with:

“In this Church and in its power are two swords, to wit, a spiritual and a temporal. . . . Both,
therefore, the spiritual and the material swords, are in the power of the Church, the latter indeed
to be used for the Church, the former by the Church, the one by the priest, the other by the hand

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 184 of 369
of kings and soldiers, but by the will and sufferance of the priest. It is fitting, moreover, that one
sword should be under the other, and the temporal authority subject to the spiritual power. . . .
It behooves us, therefore, the more freely to confess that the spiritual power excels in dignity and
nobility any form whatsoever of earthly power, as spiritual interests exceed the temporal in
importance. . . . For the truth bearing witness, it is for the spiritual power to establish the earthly
power and judge it, if it be not good. . . . Therefore, if the earthly power shall err, it shall be judged
by the spiritual power; if the lesser spiritual power err, it shall be judged by the higher. But if the
supreme power err, it can be judged by God alone and not by man, the apostles bearing witness
saying, the spiritual man judges all things but he himself is judged by no one. Hence this power,
although given to man and exercised by man, is not human, but rather a divine power, given by
the divine lips to Peter, and founded on a rock for Him and his successors in Him [Christ] whom he
confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, ‘Whatsoever thou shalt bind,’ etc. Whoever,
therefore, shall resist this power, ordained by God, resists the ordination of God. . . . We moreover,
proclaim, declare and pronounce that it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human
being to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” (Pope Boniface VIII, Bull Unam Sanctam, 1302 in
Translations and Reprints From the Original Sources of European History, volume 3
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 189- ), Number 6, pp. 20-23. The original Latin
text can be found in Mury, Revue des Questions Historiques, volume 46, pp. 255, 256, based on
the facsimile from the Papal Regesta. Emphasis supplied

Clarence Alexander Flick offers the following comment about the same pope:

“The papal theory . . . made the Pope alone God’s representative on earth and maintained that
the Emperor received his right to rule from St. Peter’s successor. . . . It was upheld by Nicholas I,
Hildebrand, Alexander III, Innocent III, and culminated with Boniface VIII at the jubilee of 1300
when, seated on the throne of Constantine, girded with the imperial sword, wearing a crown, and
waving a scepter, he shouted to the throng of loyal pilgrims: ‘I am Caesar—I am Emperor.’”
(Clarence Alexander Flick, The Rise of the Mediaeval Church (reprint: New York: Burt Franklin,
1959), p. 413)

And Flick comments further about the power of the popes during the thirteenth century:

“During this period the organization of the papal hierarchy was perfected. At the head stood the
all-powerful and absolute Pope as God’s agent on earth; hence, at least in theory and claim, he
was the ruler of the whole world in temporal and spiritual affairs. He was the defender of
Christianity, the Church, and the clergy in all respects. He was the supreme censor of morals in
Christendom and the head of a great spiritual despotism. He was the source of all earthly justice
and the final court of appeal in all cases.” (Clarence Alexander Flick, The Rise of the Mediaeval
Church (reprint: New York: Burt Franklin, 1959), pp. 575, 576. Emphasis supplied

Historian John N. Figgis adds this testimony about the medieval power of the Church:
“[In] the middle Ages the Church was not a State, it was the State; the State, or rather the civil
authority (for a separate society was not recognized), was merely the police department of the
Church. . . . [The Church] took over from the Roman Empire its theory of the absolute and

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 185 of 369
universal jurisdiction of the supreme authority, and developed it into the doctrine of the plenitudo
potestatis of the Pope.” John N. Figgis, From Gerson to Grotius, p. 4. Emphasis supplied

R. W. Southern makes this statement:

“During the whole medieval period there was in Rome a single spiritual and temporal authority
[the papacy] exercising powers which in the end exceeded those that had ever lain within the
grasp of a Roman emperor.” R. W. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages,
(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdman’s, 1970), pp. 24-25.
Lucius Ferraris, in his acclaimed work, Prompta Bibliotheca, makes the following remarks:

“The common opinion teaches that the Pope has power over two swords, namely, the spiritual
and the temporal, which jurisdiction and power Christ himself gave to Peter and his successors
(Matthew 16:19), saying, ‘I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever
thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall
be loosed in heaven,’ concerning which the doctors remark that he did not say ‘key’ but ‘keys,’
including both the temporal and the spiritual power.

“This opinion is most widely confirmed by the authority of the holy Fathers, by the teaching of the
canon and civil law, and by the apostolic constitutions.

“It is not to be wondered at if to the Roman Pontiff, as to the vicar of Him whose is the earth and
the fullness thereof, the world and all who dwell therein, etc., there have been granted, when just
cause demands, the most complete authority and power of transferring kingdoms, of dashing in
pieces scepters, of taking away crowns, not only unsheathing the spiritual but also the material
sword. Which power in its fullness, not once but frequently, the Roman pontiffs have used, as
occasion required, by girding the sword upon the thigh most effectively, as is perfectly well known;
and to this not only do theologians give most complete testimony, but also the professors of
pontifical and imperial law, and many historians of undoubted credibility, both profane and
sacred, both Greek and Latin.” Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, article, ‘Papa’ emphasis
supplied

And the Roman Catholic writer, Henry Edward, gives this testimony:

“The authority of princes and the allegiance of subjects in the civil state of nature is of divine
ordinance; and therefore, so long as princes and their laws are in conformity to the law of God,
the church has no power of jurisdiction against them, nor over them. If princes and their laws
deviate from the law of God, the church has authority from God to judge of that deviation, and
to oblige to its correction.” (Henry Edward, The Vatican Decrees (London: Longmans, Green &
Co., 1875), p. 54
The Roman Catholic papacy, which terrorized kings during the 1260 years, received a deadly blow
from the state in 1798, when pope Pius VI was taken prisoner at the very climax of the French
Revolution. At this point temporal power was removed from the papacy though it still continued

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 186 of 369
to exist as a church. John Adolphus described this significant event only five years after it
occurred:

“Berthier advanced to the city by forced marches; summoned the castle of St. Angelo [Feb. 10th.],
allowing only four hours for its evacuation by the papal troops; the convicts were set at liberty;
the gates of the city secured by the French; the pope, all the cardinals except three, and the whole
people of Rome, made prisoners at discretion. . . .

“Shortly afterwards [Feb. 15th], Berthier made his triumphal entry into Rome; and a tree of liberty
being planted on the capitol . . . a proclamation was issued, declaring. . . . a free and independent
republic, under the special protection of the French army. A provisional government was
acknowledged, as established by the sovereign people; and every other temporal authority
emanating from the pope was suppressed, nor was he any longer to exercise any function . . . The
territory of the Roman republic was declared to comprehend all that remained under the temporal
authority of the pope after the treaty of Campo Formio.
“As a refinement in the art of insult, the day selected for planting the tree of liberty and deposing
the pontiff was the anniversary of his accession to the sovereignty; and while he was, according
to custom, celebrating divine service in the Sistine chapel and receiving the congratulations of the
cardinals, Haller, the commissary-general of the French army, and Cervoni, abruptly rushed in,
and announced the termination of his authority. The pope had scarcely recovered from the shock
of this intelligence, when Cervoni offered him a national cockade, which he rejected with dignity;
and he heard with fortitude that his Swiss guards were dismissed, and republican soldiers placed
in their stead. Pursuing the same style of mockery, the invaders compelled the cardinals to
perform a grand mass and Te Deum, to thank God for events which they could not fail most
severely to deplore; public preachers were employed to reconcile the people to the change, and
to argue from Scripture that, as the disciples of reason and votaries of religion, they were bound
to submit to whatever form of government it had pleased Providence to set over them. . .

Whether retained by force, deluded by promises, or rendered inert by age, the pope remained,
after the abrogation of his authority, a prisoner in his own palace. The French first seized on it as
barracks, and in less than a week confined him to his own rooms, putting the seal of confiscation
on all his effects. Even the furniture of his apartments was at length contemplated with a greedy
eye, and the unfortunate pontiff was removed from Rome to Sienna [Feb. 20 th to 25th], where he
was received with consolatory sympathy by the Augustine monks, and lodged him in their
convent. [Note: He was removed, according to the caprice or policy of his persecutors, at all hours
in the night and day, to many cities in Italy, where he was exhibited in chains, and at length
confined in a fortress at the top of the Alps, where, under the old French government, it was
sometimes customary to send regiments by way of punishment. In the course of the ensuing year
it was deemed necessary to remove him to Valence, where he terminated his days amid the
horrors of neglect and insult. . . .” (John Adolphus, The History of France, volume 2 (London:
George Kearsley, 1803), pp. 364-369

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 187 of 369
Other historians describe this event in similar terms. Notice the following examples:

“The object of the French directory was the destruction of the pontifical government, as the
irreconcilable enemy of the republic. . . . The aged pope [Pius VI] was summoned to surrender the
temporal government; on his refusal, he was dragged from the altar. . . . His rings were torn from
his fingers, and finally, after declaring the temporal power abolished, the victors carried the pope
prisoner into Tuscany, whence he never returned (1798).

“The Papal States, converted into the Roman Republic, were declared to be in perpetual alliance
with France, but the French general was the real master at Rome. . . . The territorial possessions
of the clergy and monks were declared national property, and their former owners cast into
prison. The papacy was extinct; not a vestige of its existence remained; and among all the
Roman Catholic powers not a finger was stirred in its defense. The Eternal City had no longer
prince or pontiff; its bishop was a dying captive in foreign lands; and the decree was already
announced that no successor would be allowed in its place.” (George Trevor, Rome: From the
Fall of the Western Empire (London: The Religious Tract Society, 1868), pp. 439, 440 emphasis
supplied

“When, in 1797, Pope Pius VI fell grievously ill, Napoleon gave orders that in the event of his death
no successor should be elected to his office, and that the Papacy should be discontinued.
“But the Pope recovered; the peace was soon broken; Berthier entered Rome on 10th February
1798, and proclaimed a Republic. The aged Pontiff refused to violate his oath by recognizing it,
and was hurried from prison to prison into France. Broken with fatigue and sorrows, he died. . . .
[in] August 1799, in the French fortress of Valence, aged 82 years. No wonder that half of Europe
thought Napoleon’s veto would be obeyed, and that with the Pope the Papacy was dead.” (Joseph
Rickaby, Lectures on the History of Religion, ‘The Modern Papacy,’ volume 3, [lecture 24], p. 1)
emphasis supplied

“The tricolored flag floated on the top of the Castle of St. Angelo. The successor of St. Peter was
carried away captive by the unbelievers. He died a prisoner in their hands; and even the honors
of sepulture were long withheld from his remains.
“It is not strange that, in the year 1799, even sagacious observers should have thought that, at
length, the hour of the Church of Rome was come. An infidel power ascendant, the Pope dying in
captivity, the most illustrious prelates of France living in a foreign country on Protestant alms, the
noblest edifices which the munificence of former ages had consecrated to the worship of God
turned into temples of Victory, or into banqueting-houses for political societies, or into
Theophilanthropic chapels, such signs might well be supposed to indicate the approaching end
of that long domination.

“But the end was not yet. Again doomed to death, the milk-white hind was still fated not to die.
Even before the funeral rites had been performed over the ashes of Pius the Sixth, a great reaction
had commenced, which, after the lapse of more than forty years, appears to be still [in 1840] in
progress.” (Thomas B. Macauley, ‘Ranke’s History of the Popes’ (first published 1840), in his
Critical and Historical Essays, volume 2 (London: Longmans, 1865), pp. 147, 148. Bold is mine.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 188 of 369
“One of the first measures of the new government was to dispatch an order to Joseph Bonaparte
at Rome, to promote, by all the means in his power, the approaching revolution in the papal
states; and, above all things, to take care that, at the pope’s death [he was ill, 1797], no successor
should be elected to the chair of St. Peter.” (Archibald Alison, History of Europe, volume 1,
chapter 26 (New York: Harper, 1852), pp. 543, 544) emphasis supplied

“That the head of the church might be made to feel with more poignancy his humiliating situation,
the day chosen for planting the tree of liberty on the capitol was the anniversary of his election to
the sovereignty [Feb. 15]. Whilst he was, according to custom, in the Sistine chapel, celebrating
his accession to the papal chair, and receiving the congratulations of the Cardinals, Citizen Haller,
the commissary-general, and Cervoni, who then commanded the French troops within the city,
gratified themselves in a peculiar triumph over this unfortunate potentate. During that ceremony
they both entered the chapel, and Haller announced to the sovereign Pontiff on his throne, that
his reign was at an end.

“The poor old man seemed shocked at the abruptness of this unexpected notice, but soon
recovered himself with becoming fortitude; and when General Cervoni, adding ridicule to
oppression, presented him the national cockade, he rejected it with a dignity that shewed he was
still superior to his misfortunes. At the same time that his Holiness received this notice of the
dissolution of his power, his Swiss guards were dismissed, and Republican soldiers put in their
place.” (Richard Duppa, A Brief Account of the Subversion of the Papal Government, second
edition (London: G. G. and J. Robinson, 1799), pp. 46, 47)
”The time, however, was arrived, when it became more desirable to send him [the Pope] out of
the way, in order that his effects might be disposed of with a better grace. . . .

“It was decreed that he should go; and on the morning of the 20th of February, about seven
o’clock, he left Rome, accompanied by three coaches of his own suite, and a body of French
cavalry, to escort him safe into Tuscany; and on the 25th arrived in Siena, where he was requested
to remain till further orders. Here he was received into the monastery of S. Barbara of the order
of S. Augustin, whose members sorrowfully welcomed him at the gate, and offered all that their
Convent could bestow, to console him under his misfortunes.

“An earthquake having taken place at Siena in the month of May, the Pope was removed to a
Carthusian Convent within two miles of Florence. . . .

“He was suffered to remain in the Carthusian Convent until the 27th of March, 1799. He was then
removed to Parma; from whence he was conducted to Briancon in France, and afterward to
Valence, where he died on the 29th of August of the same year.” (Richard Duppa, A Brief Account
of the Subversion of the Papal Government. 1798, third edition (London: John Murray, 1807), pp.
50-52, 54)

“Multitudes imagined that the papacy was at the point of death and asked, would Pius VI be the
last pontiff, and if the close of the eighteenth century would be signalized by the fall of the papal
dynasty.”(T. H. Gill, The Papal Drama, book 10). Emphasis supplied

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 189 of 369
According to historian M. Weitlauff, when Pius VI died in Valence in 1799, ‘the Papacy had
suffered its deepest humiliation. . . . [and] appeared to be annihilated. . . . The Revolution also
dealt it the wound which, it seemed did not want to heal until far into the twentieth century.’
(Quoted in, Frank B. Holbrook, editor., Symposium on Revelation, volume 2 (Hagerstown,
Maryland: Review and Herald, 1992), p. 337)

Historians from this period describe Pius VI as ‘the last pope’ and refer to 1798 as ‘the end of an
era.’ Bible expositors also understood that 1798 marked the end of the 1260 years of papal
dominion. But prophecy foretold that the papacy would regain its lost dominion once again.

At this point it might be well to explain what is meant by the ‘deadly wound.’ It does not mean
that the Roman Catholic Church would cease to exist as a religious institution. This simply did not
happen in 1798; the papacy continued to exist as a church. What it does mean is that the papacy
would no longer be able to exert dominion over the state. In other words, its political power
would be arrested. The healing of the deadly wound means that the papacy, at some point after
1798, will once again be able to employ the power of the state to accomplish her purposes.

Has the deadly wound been completely healed yet? The answer is no. The healing is to be
understood as a process rather than as one particular event. The process began as early as 1801
when Napoleon returned the Papal States and gave pope Pius VII temporal power. In the words
of Arthur Robert Pennington:

“Many of the men in those days [1798] imagined that the dominion of the Pope had come to an
end, and that the knell of the temporal power was then sounding among the nations. This
supposition, however, proved to be erroneous. The French republicans were very anxious that
Rome should not have another Pope. But as the reverses of the revolutionary armies had left
southern Italy to its ancient masters, the cardinals were able to proceed to an election at Venice.
They elected, on March 14th, 1800, Barnabas Chiaromonti, who assumed the name of Pius VII.

“The first transaction of this Pope was a negotiation with the government of France, of which
Napoleon Buonaparte was the First Consul. . . .

“He [Napoleon] felt that, as the large majority of the inhabitants of France knew no other form of
faith than Romanism, it must become the established religion of the country. Accordingly we find
that he now began negotiations with the Pope, which issued in a Concordat in July, 1801, whereby
the Roman Catholic religion was once more established in France. He also left Pius in possession
of his Italian principality.” (Arthur Robert Pennington, Epochs of the Papacy (London: George
Bell and Sons, 1881), pp. 450, 452) emphasis supplied

“Even though the papacy had the Vatican and its principality once again, it exerted very little
political power between 1801 and 1870. Very few nations wished to have any relations
whatsoever with a wounded and humiliated papacy. In 1870, the papacy suffered a further blow
when Victor Emmanuel confiscated the Papal States, including Vatican City, and formed the
unified kingdom of Italy. The pope, in protest, declared himself under house arrest and no pope
left Vatican City for the next 59 years. But on February 11, 1929 a historic event took place. A

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 190 of 369
treaty was signed by Mussolini and Gasparri which restored full political control of Vatican City to
the papacy. In part the treaty provides for . . . the de iure and de facto international sovereignty
of the Holy See with its absolute and sole jurisdiction over a state called the City of the Vatican
and guarantees its freedom and independence. . . the person of the pope is inviolable and sacred,
and cardinals enjoy the honors of princes of royal blood, and wherever resident in Rome are
Vatican citizens; certain other ecclesiastics residing outside the City are given immunities; the
Vatican and Italy have ordinary diplomatic relations. . . . the Vatican City is therefore a
permanently neutral and inviolable territory. . .” (Donald Attwater, A Catholic Dictionary, third
edition, (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1958), p. 282) Emphasis supplied
The San Francisco Chronicle, dated February 12, 1929, included a front page article titled:
“MUSSOLINI AND GASPARRI SIGN HISTORIC ROMAN PACT.” In part, the article reads:

“The Roman question tonight was a thing of the past and the Vatican was at peace with Italy. The
formal accomplishment of this today was the exchange of signatures in the historic Palace of St.
John Lateran by two noteworthy plenipotentiaries, Cardinal Gasparri for Pope Pius XI and Premier
Mussolini for King Victor Emmanuel III.

“In affixing the autographs to the memorable document, healing the wound which has festered
since 1870, extreme cordiality was displayed on both sides.” (The San Francisco Chronicle,
February 12, 1929, p. 1) emphasis supplied

It must be underlined that the deadly wound was not fully healed in 1929 but at that time the
process began. After 1929 the nations of the world slowly began establishing diplomatic relations
with the Vatican once again. One after another chose to ignore the lessons of the past when the
papacy ruled over kings and princes. But the two superpowers [the United States and the Soviet
Union] refused to do so. In 1867 the United States had officially banned diplomatic relations with
the Vatican and the Soviet Union, a declared atheistic state, refused to recognize a church with
diplomatic status.

A subtle change in mood on the part of the United States government was seen when in 1951
President Harry Truman suggested that it would be a good idea to formalize diplomatic relations
with the Vatican. Truman was not prepared for the uproar and backlash from the American
people who were still well aware of the antagonism between the principles of Protestantism and
Romanism. When Truman nominated General Mark W. Clark to be our ambassador to the
Vatican, the public opposition was so strong that General Clark withdrew his name and the
nomination was killed before it reached confirmation in the Senate.

In 1970 President Richard Nixon asked Henry Cabot Lodge to make periodic visits to the Vatican
for the purpose of exchanging views on international and humanitarian projects but he did so
without diplomatic status. But on September 22, 1983 the ban on diplomatic relations came to
an end when Ronald Reagan (with barely a whimper from an inclusive and pluralistic American
people) appointed William A Wilson the first United States ambassador, not to the State of
Vatican City, but to the Holy See itself.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 191 of 369
Now, for the first time, one of the two world superpowers had contributed to the healing of the
deadly wound. Just six years later, the other superpower would cave in when in 1989 the Soviet
Union also established full diplomatic relations with the Holy See.
Though the appointment of William A. Wilson did not awaken the furor which the nomination of
General Mark W. Clark had, there was still much discussion in the Senate before his confirmation.
The discussion revolved around the issue of how the United States could send an ambassador to
a church and yet not violate the constitutional separation of church and state. Some senators
tried to obviate this problem by insisting that the ambassador was being sent to Vatican State
rather than to the Holy See. Concerning this crafty argument, Norskov Olsen remarks:

“While Vatican City is subordinated to the Holy See and ambassadors are accredited not to the
former but to the latter, it is acknowledged that the pope could not claim the prerogatives of a
temporal ruler without the Vatican City State. Referring to the international juristic personality of
the Catholic Church and the Lateral Treaty, Cardinal Hyginus Eugene, apostolic nuncio to Belgium
and the European Economic Council, writes that the latter ‘merely once more provided the Pope,
who is the spiritual sovereign of the Church, with another title to sovereignty, that of temporal
sovereignty, which would immediately cease to exist if the Vatican State became extinct.’” (V
Norskov Olsen, Papal Supremacy and American Democracy (Riverside, California: Loma Linda
University Press, 1987), p. 52

What Olsen is saying is simply this: It is impossible to say that the ambassador is being sent to
Vatican State without at the same time saying that the ambassador is being sent to the Holy See.
The reason is simple: Vatican State gives the Pope, as the religious leader of Holy See, a legitimate
right to claim temporal power. You cannot any more separate the pope’s secular power from his
religious power than you can separate the body from the spirit!

Another controversial issue had to do with how the United States could show preferential
treatment to one church above all the others. This problem was simply ignored and was never
resolved. Yet in spite of these two problems, the nomination went through with few objections.
The United States had prepared the way for the full healing of the deadly wound!

A few words about the Vatican would be in order. Vatican City is the smallest sovereign state in
the world and yet its size is disproportionate to its worldwide power and influence. It is a city
within a city whose area covers only 108.7 acres. Its total population is approximately one
thousand. It has its own ambassadors, flag, language, laws, currency, postal system, army, traffic
laws, police, baking system, newspaper [Osservatore Romano] and radio station. It is an absolute
monarchy and theocracy with the pope, Vicar of Christ, as its absolute sovereign. Notice the
following description of the pope’s power as leader of the Vatican church/state:
“All laws are a sovereign emanation of the will of the pope, who is the ultimate source of all
power, even though this is at times delegated to others for practical reasons. The pope alone has
the fullness of legislative, executive, and judicial power and represents Vatican City in
international relations.” L. Barbarito, ‘Vatican City, State of,’ New Catholic Encyclopedia, volume
14, p. 557

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 192 of 369
One might ask how such a small city/state can exert so much worldwide clout. The answer lies in
its hierarchical organizational system. Ellen White has described it well:

“The Roman Catholic Church, with all its ramifications throughout the world, forms one vast
organization under the control, and designed to serve the interests, of the papal see. Its millions
of communicants, in every country of the globe, are instructed to hold themselves as bound in
allegiance to the pope. Whatever their nationality or their government, they are to regard the
authority of the church as above all other. Though they may take the oath pledging their loyalty
to the state, yet back of this lies the vow of obedience to Rome, absolving them from every pledge
inimical to her interests.

“History testifies of her artful and persistent efforts to insinuate herself into the affairs of the
nations; and having gained a foothold, to further her own aims, even at the ruin of princes and
people.” (Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 580)

Malachi Martin concurs with Ellen White’s assessment when he states that the Roman Catholic
Papacy:

“. . . . places at the personal disposal of the Pope a supranational, supracontinental, supra-trade-

bloc structure that is so built and oriented that if tomorrow or next week, by a sudden miracle a
one-world government were established, the Church would not have to undergo any essential
structural change in order to retain its dominant position and to further its global aims.@ (Malachi
Martin, The Keys of This Blood, p. 143)

We will complete our survey of church/state amalgamation in Roman Catholicism with several
quotations from church historians and theologians starting with Pope Leo XIII.

“The church cannot give countenance or favor to those. . . . who make it their aim and purpose to
tear asunder the alliance that should, by the very nature of things, connect the interests of religion
with those of the state.” (Pope Leo XIII, The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII, ‘On the Chief
Duties of Christians as Citizens,’ third edition (New York: Benziger, 1903), p. 198

“Nor can we hope for happier results either for religion or for the civil government from the wishes
of those who desire that the Church be separated from the State, and the concord between the
secular and ecclesiastical authority be dissolved. It is clear, that these men, who yearn for a
shameless liberty, live in dread of an agreement which has always been fraught with good, and
advantageous alike to sacred and civil interests.” (Pope Leo XIII, The Great Encyclical Letters of
Pope Leo XIII, ‘The Christian Constitution of States,’ third edition, (New York: Benziger, 1903), p.
125

Henry Edward Cardinal Manning makes the following telling statement:

“Since the Council of Trent, the revolutions in France, Austria, and Italy have separated the civil
powers from the unity of the Church. The nations remain Catholic as before, but many public laws
are at variance with the laws of the Church. . . . It is of the highest moment to the civil powers of
the world to readjust their relations with the Catholic Church; for so long as the public laws are at
variance with its divine rights and liberties, internal peace and fidelity are hardly to be secured.”
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 193 of 369
Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, Petri Privilegium: Three Pastoral Letters to the Clergy of the
Diocese (London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1871), first pastoral letter, pp. 82

The textbook on public ecclesiastical law used at the Pontifical University in Rome, where the
elite of the American clergy are trained, makes the duty of Catholics in the United States very
clear:

“Catholics must make all possible efforts to bring about the rejection of this religious indifference
of the State and the instauration, as soon as possible, of the wished-for union and concord of
State and Church. . . . Whether tolerance of non-Catholic religions is promised under oath by
statutory law or not, it can never be admitted.” (James Hastings Nichols, Democracy and the
Churches (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1951), p. 266. The quotation which Hastings provides
from, is La Piana, Shane Quarterly, April, 1942, pp. 92ff
“What the papacy aimed at was not simply to be a temporal power by reason of sovereignty over
a little Italian state, but to exercise a universal sovereignty over all sovereigns by reason of the
spiritual office of the pope, who was to be the master and arbiter of all other temporal
authorities.

“The development of that ideal, the partial achievement of it, and some of the reactions against
it are what we must now consider. Lest this should seem to the modern reader a threshing over
of old straw and a discussion of dead issues, there should perhaps be inserted here a reminder
that all the popes of the last six centuries have worn the triple tiara. According to present-day
Roman Catholic authorities, its three crowns signify ‘universal episcopate, supremacy of
jurisdiction, and universal supremacy.’ In the coronation of all popes—including Pius XII, on March
12, 1939—[and presumably any thereafter]Bthe tiara is placed on the candidate’s head with the
words: ‘Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns and know that thou art Father of princes and
kings, Ruler of the world, Vicar of our Savior Jesus Christ.’ If this phraseology had not been
sanctified by long usage, it would not have been coined in this generation to express the relation
of the pope to the political and social order; but it would not have been created in the first place
if it had not meant then what is says—‘Ruler of the world.’” (Paul Hutchinson and Winfred E.
Garrison, Twenty Centuries of Christianity: A Concise History, first edition (New York: Harcourt,
Brace and World, Inc., 1959), p. 120.

Notice the following chilling words from the official Jesuit journal La Civilta Cattolica:

“The Roman Catholic Church convinced, through its divine prerogatives, of being the only true
church, must demand the right to freedom for herself alone, because such a right can only be
possessed by truth, never by error. As to other religions, the church will certainly never draw the
sword [a declaration which is suspect in the light of Roman Catholic history], but she will require
that by legitimate means they shall not be allowed to propagate false doctrine. Consequently, in
a state where the majority of the people are Catholic, the church will require that legal existence
be denied to error, and that if religious minorities actually exist, they shall have only a de facto
existence, without opportunity to spread their beliefs. If, however, actual circumstances, either
due to government hostility or the strength of dissenting groups, makes the complete application

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 194 of 369
of this principle impossible, then the [Catholic] church will require for herself all possible
concessions, limiting herself to accept as a minor evil, the de jure toleration of other forms of
worship. In some countries, Catholics will be obliged to ask full religious freedom for all, resigned
at being forced to cohabitate where they alone should rightfully be allowed to live. But in doing
this the church does not renounce her thesis, which remains the most imperative of her laws, but
merely adapts herself to de facto conditions which must be taken into account in practical affairs.
Hence arises the great scandal among Protestants, who tax the Catholics with refusing to others
freedom and even de jure toleration, in all places where they are in the majority, while they lay
claim to it as a right when they are in a minority. We ask Protestants to understand that the
Catholic Church would betray her trust if she were to proclaim, theoretically and practically, that
error can have the same rights as truth, especially where the supreme duties and interest of man
are at stake. The church cannot blush for her own want of tolerance, as she asserts it in principle
and applies it in practice.” (Quoted in, Robert McAfee Brown, American Catholics: A Protestant-
Jewish View, ‘The Issues Which Divide Us,’ edited by Philip Scharper (New York: Sheed and Ward,
Inc., 1959), pp. 82-86.

In recent years a very significant book has been written by Malachi Martin, Jesuit priest. This
book, The Keys of this Blood, discusses the struggle for world dominion among three globalist
contenders: Capitalism, Communism and Roman Catholicism. Martin states:

“There is one great similarity shared by all three of these globalist competitors. Each one has in
mind a particular grand design for one world governance. . . . Their geopolitical competition is
about which of the three will form, dominate and run the world system that will replace the
decaying nation system.” (Malachi Martin, The Keys of This Blood, p. 18)

And Martin makes it clear that this is an all-out, three-way war for all the marbles:

“No holds barred because, once the competition has been decided, the world and all that’s in it—
our way of life as individuals and as citizens of the nations; our families and our jobs; our trade
and commerce and money; our educational systems and our religions and our cultures; even the
badges of our national identity, which most of us have always taken for granted—all will have
been powerfully and radically altered forever. No one can be exempted from its effects. No sector
of our lives will remain untouched. . . . . Nobody who is acquainted with the plans of these three
rivals has any doubt but that only one of them can win” (Malachi Martin, The Keys of This Blood,
p. 16)
Martin then explains how soon we can expect the winner to take over world control:

“As to the time factor involved, those of us who are under seventy will see at least the basic
structures of the new world government installed. Those of us under forty will surely live under its
legislative, executive and judiciary authority and control.” (Malachi Martin, The Keys of this
Blood, pp. 15-16)

The question still remains, which of the three contenders is destined to prevail? Martin entertains
no doubts that it will be the Roman Catholic Papacy. In fact, the basic thesis of the book is that

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 195 of 369
Roman Catholicism will once again rule the world as she did during the Middle Ages. This result,
according to Martin, has been predestined by God and is inevitable because Jesus promised Peter
and his successors that not even the gates of hell would be able to triumph over the Church. Let’s
examine a few of Martin’s astounding statements concerning the Roman Catholic papacy:

“In all phases of education, in all aspects of moral behavior and in all questions about the ultimate
truths undergirding the life and death of every human being, this man [John Paul II] claims for his
papal persona the right, the privilege, the duty and the due authority to stand as judge. . . . For,
in the final analysis, John Paul II as the claimant Vicar of Christ does claim to be the ultimate court
of judgment on the society of states as a society.” (Malachi Martin, The Keys of this Blood, pp.
345, 375) Emphasis supplied

“The final prerequisite for georeligious capability is authority. The institution, in its organizational
structures and undertakings, must have unique authority: an authority that is centralized; an
authority that is autonomous, vis-a-vis all other authority on the supranational plane; an
authority that carries with it such sanctions as are effective in maintaining the unity and the aims
of the institution as it goes about its business of serving the greatest good of the community as a
whole and in its every part.” (Malachi Martin, The Keys of this Blood, p. 138) emphasis supplied

Martin repeatedly affirms that John Paul II and the Roman Catholic papacy wish to return to the
arrangement which existed in the middle Ages where the Church was in control of all spheres of
life. Notice the following example:

“In that world of early Europe, everythingCpolitics, commerce, civil law, legitimate government,
art, learning—all depended on the ecclesiastical structure that stretched from the pope to
cardinals and bishops, priests and monks, and outward through all the ramifications of life.”
(Malachi Martin, The Keys of this Blood, p. 518)

Speaking about the christianization of Europe in the fourth century and its aftermath, Martin
remarks:

“Out of this new population, the Church diligently formed the matrix from which came the
civilization that developed all those higher civil, political, artistic and cultural values treasured
today as marks of progress and civilization—justice, compassion, democracy, dignity, the rights
of man, even medicine and science. A new Europe now enjoyed a unity and a verve that the
ancient Roman Empire, even at its apogee, had never been able to create.

“The centerpiece of it all was the man who sat on the throne of Simon Peter in the Holy See of
Rome. Among the major players at the Round Table of international politics, no ruler could take
command, no government could govern, no commerce could function, without the spiritual
blessing and the imperial nod of the Roman Pope.

“Moreover, whatever overlordship this man, the Roman Pontiff, exercised—whatever armies or
fleets he commanded or could assemble; whatever binding laws he laid down governing civil,
political, artistic and personal life throughout Europe—ultimately his right and claim to do so was

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 196 of 369
based on his possession of Peter’s Keys of supreme spiritual authority.” (Malachi Martin, The
Keys of this Blood, p. 134)

Here Martin presents a rosy picture of a peaceful, democratic Europe where science flourished
and democracy led to the respect of human rights and dignity. This picture is an aberration of the
facts. Europe was really ravaged by disease, illiteracy, poverty and strife. Human rights were
violated by horrendous mechanisms such as the Inquisition and wars were the order of the day.
The question is: Do modern democratic nations wish to return to this style of government?

And for those who think that the Roman Catholic papacy is an archaic dinosaur system of bygone
times, Martin has this ominous warning:

“Any world leader who discounts the eternal revelations on which papal power claims to be based
flirts with problems. But, at the same time, any world leader who takes the Roman Pontiff as
possessing only the spiritual weapons of the unseen world and the afterlife with which to deal in
practical, this worldly matters is making a strategic error of great proportions.” (Malachi Martin,
The Keys of this Blood, p. 132)

Martin makes it clear that the Roman Catholic papacy aims to recover her lost position as the
geopolitical and georeligious leader of the world. In other words, she plans to gain both religious
and political control of the world. Dave Hunt has discerned this intent in the following comment
in his book, Global Peace:

“Why do world leaders want to get into bed with the Vatican? The heads of state in today’s world
all recognize that the Pope wields a power which in many ways is even greater than their own. It
is not only Catholicism’s 900 million subjects and enormous wealth that causes the world’s most
powerful governments to cultivate friendly relations with the Roman Catholic Church; it is because
Vatican City’s citizens are found in great numbers in nearly every country. They constitute an
international network that reaches into the inside circles of the world’s power centers.” (Dave
Hunt, Global Peace, p. 116)
And in remarks which could very well have been written by a Seventh-day Adventist [though Hunt
is an Evangelical whose prophetic views are for the most part inimical to Adventism], Dave Hunt
makes the following chilling remarks about the whole world wondering after the beast:

“This indicates that not only Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy will be united, but that
Protestants will join together with them, along with all of the world’s religions, including even the
Muslims to form one new world religion. . . . It has become quite clear that the world religion
under the Antichrist will not be atheism, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, or even New Age. It will be
Christianity, but in a paganized formBexactly what it became under the leadership of Constantine
and his successors, the popes. The coming world religion will have its headquarters in Rome.”
(Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, pp. 39, 200)

The papacy has come a long way since the French Revolution. The states which then withdrew
their support from her are now flirting with her once again. Truly those who forget the lessons
of history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. Little do the political systems of the world realize

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 197 of 369
the geopolitical and georeligious aspirations of the Papacy. Tragically, prophecy predicts that
they will wake up to realize their colossal mistake only when it is too late to do anything about it.
Truly, the papacy is a different power because it is an amalgamation of church and state!
Characteristic #10:
The little horn was to govern for a period expressed as ‘time, times and the dividing of time’
(Daniel 7:25; see also, Revelation 12:14). This period is also described as 1260 days (Revelation
11:3; 12:6) and 42 months (Revelation 11:2; 13:5). Virtually all Bible scholars agree that ‘time’
means one year, ‘times’ is a dual form which means ‘two years’ and ‘the dividing of time’ means
one half year. But very few contemporary scholars believe that the year/day principle must be
applied to these time periods. Both preterists and futurists take these periods as three and a half
literal years. Seventh-day Adventists, on the other hand, apply the year/day principle and with
good reason (at this point, study the document by Stephen P. Bohr, ‘Twenty Reasons to Apply the
Year/Day Principle’).

We have already noted (characteristic # 4), how the Roman Catholic papacy came to power.
Through the help of the state, the papacy overthrew the unorthodox Heruli (493) and Vandals
(534). But one rival power remained, the Arian Ostrogoths.

As we have previously seen, Justinian gave his famous decree in 533 making the pope the ‘head
of all the holy churches’ in the East and in the West and promising to exert all his power to
‘increase the honor and authority’ of the pope’s See. But this official decree of the state could
not be fully enforced until the rebel Ostrogoths were uprooted. In February of 538 (note the
date!) the Ostrogoths were dealt a devastating defeat from which they never recovered. At this
point the state’s decree could be fully enforced.

It seems more than coincidence that precisely 1260 years after Justinian’s decree, on November
26, 1793, the French government, through its Legislative Assembly, proclaimed an official decree
abolishing religion and forbidding its free exercise. Churches were closed and Bibles were burned
in the public plaza. Concerning this, Sir Walter Scott states:

“And as the recognition of the supremacy of the Pope seemed thus to be complete in the year
533, on the part of the emperor [Justinian] who put the power in his hands, so, in like rapid and
yet graduated progress, with the same appointed space intervening, the dominion of the Papacy
was destroyed and disannulled in that kingdom which had been its chief stay for ages, in the year
1793, the power was wholly taken out of the hands of the Pope, and infidelity, or rather atheism,
was proclaimed, and popery was abolished.

“The churches were in most districts of France closed against priests and worshipers—the bells
were broken and cast into canon—and the whole ecclesiastical establishment destroyed.” (Sir
Walter Scott, Life of Napoleon, volume 2, p. 306; cited in, Alexander Keith, The Signs of the Times,
volume 2 (Edinburgh: William Whyte & Co., 1833), pp. 93, 94)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 198 of 369
W. H. Hutton also comments on the significance of 1793:

“On November 26, 1793, the Convention, of which seventeen bishops and some clergy were
members, decreed the abolition of all religion.” (W. H. Hutton, Age of Revolution, p. 156)

And, exactly 1260 years after the Ostrogoths had been uprooted by Emperor Justinian General
Berthier entered Vatican City, removed Pope Pius VI from his throne and told him that his power
was finished. Notably, the date was February 10, 1798 (for more on the meaning of Berthier’s
act and documentation from historians, see characteristic # 9).

Thus 538 and 1798 are closely related. In 538 the pope was given universal sovereignty by the
implementation of an imperial decree and in 1798 the pope was removed from that sovereignty
by an official act of the emperor, Napoleon Bonaparte. And the power was removed exactly 1260
years, to the month, after it was given. Surely this is more than a historical coincidence!! The acid
test of historical fulfillment requires that the year/day principle be applied to the 1260 days.

In 1986, Malachi Martin, a Roman Catholic Jesuit priest, made the following remarkable
statement about the papacy:

“[For] fifteen hundred years and more, Rome had kept as strong a hand as possible in each local
community around the wide world. . . . By and large, and admitting some exceptions, that had
been the Roman view until two hundred years of inactivity had been imposed upon the papacy
by the major secular powers of the world.” Quoted in Christianity Today (November 21, 1986),
p. 26.

In this remarkable statement, Martin makes three very important points: 1) Though we would
dispute the historical accuracy of the universal dominion of the papacy for fifteen hundred years,
it is significant that Martin does admit that the papacy had a career of over one thousand years
of dominion, 2) for two hundred years the papacy has been inactive (two hundred years before
1986 would place us approximately at the French Revolution). This fits perfectly with Ellen
White’s statement, previously quoted, where she warns that if secular powers remove their
restraint, the papacy will regain its power and 3) this inactivity was imposed by the major secular
powers of the world.

Even Dave Hunt, a futurist who believes that the little horn represents a literal person who will
sit in a rebuilt Jewish temple for three and a half literal years admits that the papacy had an
apostate career which lasted over one millennium. Speaking about the reaction of the church
when the Edict of Milan was proclaimed by Constantine, Hunt remarks:

“Freedom at last from persecution seemed like a gift from God. Unfortunately, it set the stage for
an apostasy that would envelop Christendom for more than a millennium. Christ’s bride had been
wedded to paganism.” Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, p. 202-203.

Again, Hunt writes:

“Rome’s dominance of Church and world for more than a thousand years through
excommunication, torture and death had led to corruption of such proportions that even the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 199 of 369
secular world recoiled in shame and horror. . . . The truth is that Roman Catholicism did not
represent Christ and was not His Church. For at least a thousand years before the reformation
the true church was composed of multitudes of simple Christians who were not part of the Roman
system.” (Dave Hunt, A Woman Rides the Beast, pp. 190, 254. Emphasis supplied
It is perplexing indeed that Hunt is not able to see the fulfillment of the little horn in the Roman
Catholic papacy. Above, he speaks of more than l000 years of papal dominion, of the persecution
of the saints, of a faithful church during this period, and of a corrupt system which claimed to
represent Christ and yet was apostate. Though he apparently doesn’t realize it, his description of
this period fits perfectly with the depiction in Revelation 12:6, 13-15 and Daniel 7:25. But Hunt
fails to see the connection between prophecy and history because he is looking at prophecy
through futurist eyeglasses.

Hunt’s blindness is all the more amazing when we consider his description of what, in his view,
the final individual Antichrist will be like:

“While the Greek prefix ‘anti’ generally means ‘against’ or ‘opposed to,’ it can also mean ‘in the
place of’ or ‘a substitute for.’ The Antichrist will embody both meanings. He will oppose Christ
while pretending to be Christ. . . . . When the time has come for his ascension to power—it will
be in the midst of an unprecedented global crisis—he will be hailed as the world’s savior, and so
he will appear to be. . . . Instead of a frontal assault against Christianity, the evil one will pervert
the church from within by posing as its founder. He will cunningly misrepresent Christ while
pretending to be Christ. And by that process of substitution he will undermine and pervert all
that Christ truly is. . . . If the Antichrist will indeed pretend to be the Christ, then his followers must
be ‘Christians’! The church of that day will without dissenting voice, hail him as its leader.” Dave
Hunt, Global Peace, pp. 7-8, 45, 200. Emphasis mine and italics his
The fact is, we do not have to wait until the future for Hunt’s description of the Antichrist to be
fulfilled. Every single characteristic of Antichrist given by Hunt has already been fulfilled in the
Roman Catholic papacy. Someone might question if the institution of the papacy arose in the
midst of an unprecedented global crisis. Even a cursory glance at the history of the Roman Empire
will reveal that the papacy arose when the Roman Empire was crumbling to pieces. It appeared
that the empire was about to disappear from history. But it did not. It found in the papacy a
unifying and saving force which kept the empire together. And the papacy governed exactly 1260
years!
What Hunt and other futurists fail to realize is that, according to Bible prophecy, the papacy was
to have two periods of existence. It governed in the past for three and a half prophetic times and
then was dealt a deadly wound. But it will also govern in the future when it’s deadly wound is
healed. The only way the future career of the Antichrist can be understood is by discerning its
past history. That is to say, only the method of historicism can provide a full and complete
understanding of the Antichrist!

In contrast to Hunt, the historicist J. A. Wylie did see the papacy as the Antichrist. Notice Wylie’s
words:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 200 of 369
“It is clear that Antichrist, as depicted by our Lord and by his apostle John, is to wear a mask, and
to profess one thing and act another. He is to enter the church as Judas entered the
gardenBprofessedly to kiss his Master, but in reality to betray him. He is to come with words of
peace in his mouth, but war in his heart. He is to be a counterfeit Christ—Christ’s likeness stamped
on base metal. He is to be an imitation of Christ—a close, clever, and astute imitation, which will
deceive the world for ages, those only excepted who, taught by the Holy Spirit, shall be able to
see through the disguise and detect the enemy under the mask of the friend.” J. A. Wylie, The
Papacy is the Antichrist (Edinburgh: George M. Gibbon), pp. 17, 18. Emphasis supplied

Wylie shows that the word Antichrist does not mean primarily ‘against Christ’ but rather, ‘in place
of Christ.’ Notice how Wylie connects the word Antichrist with the expression ‘Vicar of Christ’:

The apostle John . . . speaking of the apostasy, the coming of which he predicts, styles it the
‘Antichrist.’ And we have also said that the Papacy, speaking through its representative and head,
calls itself the ‘Vicar of Christ.’ The first, ‘antichrist,’ is a Greek word; the second, ‘vicar,’ is an
English word; but the two are in reality one, for both words have the same meaning. Antichrist
translated into English is vice-Christ, or Vicar of Christ; and Vicar of Christ, rendered into Greek, is
‘antichrist’—antichristos. If we can establish this—and the ordinary use of the word by those to
whom the Greek was a vernacular, is decisive on the point—we shall have no difficulty in showing
that this is the meaning of the word ‘Antichrist,’ even a vice-Christ. And if so, then every time the
Pope claims to be the Vicar of Christ, he pleads at the bar of the world that he is the Antichrist.”
J. A. Wylie, The Papacy is the Antichrist (Edinburgh: M. Gibbon), p. 2.

Wylie is not inventing a new meaning for the word ‘Antichrist.’ It is true that in the Greek the
preposition anti can mean ‘against.’ But it is equally true that this preposition can mean ‘instead
of,’ ‘in place of,’ or ‘a substitute for.’ In classical Greek, for example, the word antibasileus means
‘one occupies the place of the king.’ One who fills the place of a consul is called anthupatos. In
the New Testament the name Herod ‘Antipas’ means that Herod ruled ‘in place of’ his father. The
word antitype means ‘that which takes the place of the type.’ Christ is spoken of as having given
His life a ransom ‘in place of all’ (antilutron).
In all honesty we ask: How many powers arose after the fragmentation of the old Roman Empire,
ruled for 1260 years and had a leader who claimed to occupy the place of Christ on earth? There
is one and only one: THE ROMAN CATHOLIC PAPACY!!!

One final statement on the 1260 days from the inspired writings of Ellen White:

“The forty two months are the same as the ‘time and times and the dividing of time,’ three years
and a half, or 1260 days, of Daniel 7—the time during which the papal power was to oppress
God’s people. This period, as stated in preceding chapters, began with the supremacy of the
papacy, A. D. 538, and terminated in 1798. At that time the pope was made captive by the French
army, the papal power received its deadly wound, and the prediction was fulfilled, ‘He that
leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity.’” Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 439

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 201 of 369
Characteristic #11: The antichrist will have eyes like a man.

Abominations

There are several views of antichrist in the Bible: The abomination of desolation, the king of the
north, the harlot, the beast, the man of sin and the little horn (in Daniel 7 and 8)

I want to focus on one characteristic that all of these portrayals of the antichrist have in
common—his reliance on the tradition of men rather than on the Word of God

For some background let’s begin our study in Ezekiel 8.

Abominations in Ezekiel

The book of Ezekiel is describing the spiritual condition of Jerusalem shortly before it was
destroyed in the year 586 BC Ezekiel 8 is known as the ‘abominations chapter’ because it lists the
abominations that were being committed in the city by the very ones who claimed to be God’s
people.

Ezekiel 8:15, 16:

"Then He said to me, "Have you seen this, O son of man? Turn again, you will see greater
abominations than these." 16 So He brought me into the inner court of the Lord's house; and
there, at the door of the temple of the Lord, between the porch and the altar, were about twenty-
five men with their backs toward the temple of the Lord and their faces toward the east, and they
were worshiping the sun toward the east.”

Before the first destruction of Jerusalem Ezekiel emphasized that these abominations would lead
to its imminent desolation (Daniel 9:2, 18). Thus we have ‘the abomination of desolation.’

In Ezekiel 11:22, 23 the prophet predicted how the Shekinah forsook the temple and lingered for
a few moments on the Mount of Olives east of the City:

“So the cherubim lifted up their wings, with the wheels beside them, and the glory of the God of
Israel was high above them. And the glory of the Lord went up from the midst of the city and
stood on the mountain, which is on the east side of the city.”

The Shekinah then left and the city was desolated by King Nebuchadnezzar.

Abomination in Matthew

Matthew 24:15: The word ‘Abomination’ is also used in connection with the second desolation
of Jerusalem by the Romans in the year 70 AD (it would be well to remember also that the
apostasy and destruction of Jerusalem will have another fulfillment globally at the end of time.
We will come back to this when we look at Revelation 17):

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 202 of 369
“Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet,
standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand), 16 "then let those who are in
Judea flee to the mountains.”

Ellen White explains the nature of the abomination:

“When the idolatrous standards of the Romans [which had an eagle and a golden wreath and
the Roman armies worshiped them] should be set up in the holy ground, which extended some
furlongs outside the city walls, then the followers of Christ were to find safety in flight. When the
warning sign should be seen, those who would escape must make no delay” The Great
Controversy, p. 26

Abomination during the 1260 Years

Daniel 11:30 affirms that during the 1260 years the king of the north would ‘have intelligence
[be in agreement] with them that forsake the covenant’.

Deuteronomy 4:12-13: How would a Jew have understood the expression ‘forsake the
covenant’?

“And the Lord spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of the words, but saw
no form; you only heard a voice. 13 So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you
to perform, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.”

Daniel 11:31 explains that during the 1260 years of papal dominion, the abomination of
desolation would once again set up:

“And forces shall be mustered by him, and they [king of the north and the forces] shall defile the
sanctuary fortress; then they [king of the north and forces] shall take away the daily sacrifices
[the word ‘sacrifices’ is not in the original], and place there the abomination of desolation.”

Abomination in Revelation 17

Revelation 17:1, 2, 4: describes the great apostasy that will exist in the religious world in the end
time.

"Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and talked with me, saying to me,
"Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot [an apostate church] who sits on many
waters [the multitudes], 2 with whom the kings of the earth committed fornication, and the
inhabitants of the earth were made drunk [fermented or corrupted wine] with the wine of her
fornication."… 4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and
precious stones and pearls, having in her hand a golden cup full of abominations [the wine is
composed of her abominations] and the filthiness of her fornication.”

The wine of Babylon is composed of her abominations. And what is meant by the word
‘abominations’? Scripture uses this word to describe several things: Idol worship, teaching that

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 203 of 369
it is not necessary to keep the law, attempting to speak with or to the dead, saying it is alright
to eat unclean foods and teaching that one can be saved by his/her own works. But the greatest
of all abominations, as we have seen in Ezekiel, is worshiping the sun.

The Beast has a Human Number

Revelation 13:18: The beast speaks blasphemies, persecutes de saints, tramples on the heavenly
sanctuary, has a mark of its authority and rules for 42 months.

"Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the
number of a man [better: ‘the number of man’]: His number is 666.” [We will come back to this
number at the end of this presentation]

The Man of Sin and Lawlessness

2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4, 7: These verses describe the Man of Sin who leads out in the mystery of
lawlessness:

“Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes
first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above
all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing
himself that he is God. . … 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now
restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.”

The Conniving Little Horn of Daniel 8

Daniel 8:23, 25: Describes the same little horn as Daniel 7. The little horn is described as a king
with a fierce countenance. The picture is one of a leader who is a sly, slithery, cunning and crafty
politician who uses crafty human wisdom and knowledge to deceive. Let’s notice how various
versions translate the key phrases of Daniel 8:23, 25:

NKJV:

"And in the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors have reached their fullness, a
king shall arise, having fierce features who understands sinister schemes. . . 25 through his
cunning he shall cause deceit to prosper under his rule.”

NIV: “. . . a stern-faced king, a master of intrigue. . . He will cause deceit to prosper”

NASB: “. . . insolent and skilled in intrigue. . . and through his shrewdness he will cause deceit to
succeed by his influence.”

ESV: “. . . A king of bold face, one who understands riddles . . . by his cunning he shall make deceit
prosper.”

NET: “. . . a rash and deceitful king . . . by his treachery he will succeed through deceit.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 204 of 369
God’s Word: “. . . stern-looking king who understands mysterious things. . . He will cleverly use
his power to deceive others successfully.”

NRSV: ". . . a king of bold countenance shall arise, skilled in intrigue . . . by his cunning he shall
make deceit prosper under his hand.”

LIVING BIBLE: ". . . an angry king shall rise to power with great shrewdness and intelligence . . .
he will be a master of deception.”

AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION: ". . . king of fierce countenance and understanding dark
sentences . . . and through his policy he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand.”

AMPLIFIED: ". . . a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark trickery and craftiness
shall stand up . . . and through his policy he shall cause trickery to prosper in his hand”

Meaning of the Word

The word is used in several places in the Old Testament and it always refers to using crafty
intelligence to unlock riddles, mysteries or dark sayings. It is used eight times of Samson’s
riddles (Judges 14), of the Queen of Sheba who came to test Solomon’s wisdom with her hard
questions (I Kings 10:1).

Proverbs 1:5-6

“A wise man will hear and increase learning, and a man of understanding will attain wise counsel
6 to understand a proverb and an enigma, the words of the wise and their riddles.”

But in Daniel 8 we are not dealing with the sanctified use of wisdom and intelligence but rather
a corruption of it.
Ezekiel 28:2-5, 12, 17: The word is used of Lucifer who corrupted his wisdom.
"…Because your heart is lifted up, and you say, 'I am a god, I sit in the seat of gods, in the midst
of the seas,' yet you are a man, and not a god, though you set your heart as the heart of a god 3
(Behold, you are wiser than Daniel! There is no secret that can be hidden from you! 4 With your
wisdom and your understanding you have gained riches for yourself, and gathered gold and silver
into your treasuries; 5 by your great wisdom in trade you have increased your riches, and your
heart is lifted up because of your riches). . . 12 You were the seal of perfection, full of wisdom and
perfect in beauty. . . 17 Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; you corrupted your
wisdom for the sake of your splendor.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 205 of 369
Daniel 7:8
Daniel 7 portrays a sequence of powers. Let’s review them:

 Babylon (605-539 BC)

 Medes and Persians (539-331 BC)
 Greece (331-168 BC)
 Rome (168 BC – 476 AD)
 Divisions of Rome (476-538 AD)
 Little horn (538 AD – 1798 AD ‘eyes like a man’)

But the text that especially interests us in this study is Daniel 7:8 where the little horn is described
as having ‘eyes like the eyes of a man.’

“I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them,
before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were
eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words.”

It is important to remember that Daniel 7 contains a symbolic portrayal. The four beasts, the
heads, the wings, the sea, the winds, the ten horns, the little horn, the mouth, the actions and
the time period of the little horn are all symbolic and therefore the eyes must also represent
something beyond the literal.

The question is: What do eyes represent, symbolically speaking? Let’s see.

Symbolic of Wisdom

It is common knowledge that ‘eyes’ in Scripture are employed to represent ‘wisdom’ ‘knowledge’
or ‘understanding.’

Many examples of this exist. With relation to God, eyes are employed to depict His all-
encompassing knowledge and understanding, that is, His omniscience.

Symbolic Meaning of Eyes

Ezekiel 10:12: The four living creatures that are in charge of administrating the universe are full
of eyes because they carry on God’s work with absolute wisdom.

“And their whole body, with their back, their hands, their wings, and the wheels that the four had,
were full of eyes all around.”

Revelation 5:6: Seven eyes represent the omniscience of the Holy Spirit.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 206 of 369
“And I looked, and behold, in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the
midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as though it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes,
which are the seven Spirits of God sent out into all the earth.”

Zechariah 4:10

“For who has despised the day of small things? For these seven rejoice to see the plumb line in
the hand of Zerubbabel. They are the eyes of the Lord, which scan to and fro throughout the
whole earth.”

Proverbs 15:3

“The eyes of the Lord are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good.”

Hebrews 4:12, 13

“For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even
to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and
intents of the heart. 13 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and
open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account.”

With respect to man, eyes are also employed to represent discernment, knowing or
understanding but in contrast to God, man’s understanding is finite.

Ephesians 1:15-18

“Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints, 16 do
not cease to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers: 17 that the God of our Lord
Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the
knowledge of Him, 18 the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know
what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints.”

Proverbs 3:19-21

“The Lord by wisdom founded the earth; by understanding He established the heavens; 20 By His
knowledge the depths were broken up, and clouds drop down the dew. 21 My son, let them not
depart from your eyes—keep sound wisdom and discretion.”

Acts 26:17-18

“I will deliver you from the Jewish people, as well as from the Gentiles, to whom I now send you,
18 to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan

to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are
sanctified by faith in Me.'

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 207 of 369
Even today the owl is employed as a symbol of intelligence or understanding because of its large
eyes! We use the expression: “wise as an owl”. Graduation cards use the owl frequently. The
eyes of Owls are fixed but they can turn their necks up to 270 degrees

Now, if ‘eyes’ represent ‘wisdom’ or ‘understanding’, then human eyes must represent human
wisdom or knowledge. This must mean that the little horn depends on human wisdom or
understanding even though it claims to exercise the power and prerogatives of God!

And what is its primary objective?

Daniel 7:25:

“He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, shall persecute the saints of the Most
High, and shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand for a
time and times and half a time.”

Numerical Value of the Greek Alphabet

Alpha α 1
Beta β 2
Gamma γ 3
Delta δ 4
Épsilon ε 5
Stigma Ϛ 6
Zeta ζ 7
Eta η 8
Theta θ 9
Iota ι 10
Kappa κ 20
Lamda λ 30
Mu μ 40
Nu ν 50
Xi ξ 60
Omicron ο 70
Pi π 80
Ro ρ 100
Sigma σς 200
Tau τ 300
Upsilon υ 400
Phi φ 500
Chi χ 600
Psi ψ 700
Omega ω 800

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 208 of 369
 Jesus (Iesous)

Jesus: I (10) E (8) S (200) O (70) U (400) S (200) = 888

Cross (stauros)

Cross: ST (6) A (1) U (400) R (100) O (70) S (200) = 777

Tradition (Paradosis)

P (80) A (1) R (100) A (1) D (4) O (70) S (200) I (10) S (200) = 666

Notice the interesting picture of the priest at the voting in the Colombian presidential election:

 The photographer and newspaper are oblivious to the meaning of the number.
 A priest comes to the table.
 His sleeve covers up one of the numbers.
 The photographer is at that particular table at that particular moment.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 209 of 369
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 210 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #14 – THE JEWISH VIEW OF TRADITION

Introduction

Last time we studied one characteristic of the little horn that rarely is touched upon, the eyes
like the eyes of man. We saw that in the Bible eyes represent wisdom so this system must base
its teachings on human wisdom.

How can the Roman Catholic Church justify teaching doctrines and commanding observances
that are not found in the Bible either explicitly or implicitly? Doctrines such as the Immaculate
Conception, the Assumption of Mary, Mary as the mediator, celibacy of the priesthood, the
sacrifice of the Mass, Lent, infant baptism, baptism by sprinkling, the Confessional, indulgences,
praying to the dead, reciting the Rosary, not eating meat on Fridays, bowing before idols,
keeping Sunday instead of the Sabbath, etc.? The answer is: Because of its concept of tradition.

The Jewish View of Tradition

In order to better comprehend how the Roman Catholic Church can teach these human
traditions that have no foundation whatever in the written word of God, we must go back to the
times of Christ and examine the Jewish view of divine revelation in the times of Christ,
particularly the view of the Scribes and Pharisees. We shall find in our study that the Roman
Catholic Church has replicated the Jewish view!
The Jewish view of tradition in the days of Christ was composed of three complimentary
elements:

 A deposit of Tradition composed of the writings of Moses and the unwritten traditions given
orally to Moses
 A transmitting mechanism to pass on in a trustworthy manner from generation to generation
the writings of Moses and the unwritten traditions
 A living teaching office in each generation that could, infallibly, explain, apply, amplify and bring
forth from the deposit of Tradition the truths that were found in the writings of Moses and the
unwritten traditions
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 211 of 369
  The key words are ‘tradition’, ‘receive’, ‘pass on’ ‘hold’

The Deposit of Revelation (written and oral): the word Tradition in

singular

The Scribes and Pharisees believed that when God spoke to Moses on Mt. Sinai, He not only
revealed what Moses actually wrote in the Pentateuch but He also revealed many other oral
traditions which Moses did not commit to writing.

Thus, in their view, there was an original deposit [singular] of truth revealed by God which was
composed of two sources: the [1] written revelation and the [2] unwritten traditions.

Equal Authority

Though at first the written revelation was given a position of higher authority than the unwritten
traditions, in the time of Christ as can be clearly seen in the gospels, the unwritten traditions had
assumed a position of higher authority than what Moses actually wrote.

The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia expresses the Jewish concept of tradition in this
way:

“It [tradition] means, in Jewish theology, the Oral teachings of the elders (distinguished ancestors
from Moses on) which were reverenced by the late Jews equally with the written teachings of the
Old Testament, and were regarded by them as equally authoritative on matters of belief and
conduct.”
A Trustworthy Transmitting Agent

It was necessary to have some mechanism whereby the written traditions in the deposit of
tradition could be preserved and passed on from generation to generation in a trustworthy
manner.

Passing on the written word was not a major problem. But how could the oral traditions that
were passed on by word of mouth from generation to generation be kept pure? As is well known,
with the passing of time, things that are passed on orally become distorted and are therefore
untrustworthy.

The scholars came up with the idea that it was necessary to have an accurate and faithful
transmitting agent that would keep the oral traditions pure and unadulterated as they were
passed along from generation to generation.

And so the Pharisees believed and taught that the written and unwritten revelation was reliably
passed on from generation to generation by an unbroken succession of highly educated spiritual
leaders beginning with Moses and culminating with the rabbis in the days of Christ.

The Interpreter’s Bible Dictionary captures well this Jewish concept of tradition:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 212 of 369
“The Talmud [a compilation of the oral traditions] which was at first mainly oral, grew out of the
conviction that besides the written Torah (Law)--the Bible--there had been from the first, from
the divine communications to Moses at Sinai onward, an oral Torah handed down from
generation to generation, which lawgiver and prophets sought to engrave on the hearts of the
people. As teacher succeeded teacher in the synagogue and school, their teachings and often
conflicting opinions, all based on the Bible, were treasured. Through long practice the power of
memorizing had been greatly strengthened, but the accumulated mass of oral traditions and
teachings became so unwieldy that the best memory could not be trusted [therefore they were
written in the Talmud].” (The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, volume 4, p. 511)

Josephus, who was himself a Pharisee and who was born in the year 37 A. D. described this
transmission process:

‘. . . The Pharisees had passed on to the people certain regulations handed down by former
generations and not recorded in the law of Moses.’ (Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews,
13.10.6, emphasis supplied)

Marcel Simon, in his excellent book, Jewish Sects, offers a helpful explanation of the words of
Josephus. After stating that the Pharisees went beyond the written text of the Scriptures and
qualified and expanded it, Simon remarks:

“In their eyes [of the Pharisees], the tradition that they invoked in doing this [of going beyond the
text], far from opposing the Torah [the five books of Moses], was the natural prolongation and
explication of it. This tradition went back to Moses himself, just as did the Torah. An oral law
was revealed to Moses along with the written law, and this oral law was faithfully transmitted
from generation to generation.” (Marcel Simon, Jewish Sects, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press,
1967), p. 34-35

Process of Transmission

Simon then quotes the famous words in the Talmud found in Aboth [“the Fathers”] 1:1-2:

“[1] Moses received the Law from Sinai and committed it to [2] Joshua, and Joshua to the [3]
elders, and the elders to the [4] Prophets; and the Prophets committed it to the men of the [5]
Great Synagogue [after the Captivity].”

Simon remarks that after describing this process of transmission in verses 1, 2 the Talmud
provides (in verses 2-13) an “. . . enumeration of several pairs of teachers (‘Antigonus of Soko
received the Law from Simeon the Just, etc.’) whose historical existence is more or less certain.
The list finally ends with Hillel and Shammai, famous leaders of schools [in the days of Christ]
(Beth Hillel and Beth Shammai).” (Marcel Simon, Jewish Sects (Philadelphia: Fortress Press), p.
35

It is obvious that the Talmud is attempting to prove that oral tradition was transmitted in an
unbroken succession of scholars from the time of Moses till the days of the Scribes and Pharisees
in the days of Christ.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 213 of 369
George Foot Moore, in his monumental work, Judaism, concurs with Simon:

‘The Book of the Law of Moses might be a final law, but it was not a finished law. Many things
which had . . . been generally observed and were regarded as necessary and binding were not
contained in it at all. Some of these figure in later times as ‘traditions of Moses from Sinai’; others
as ordinances of Ezra, or of the prophets of his time, or the men of the Great Synagogue, or more
indefinitely of the Soferim, or the Early Elders.” (George Foot Moore, Judaism, volume 1 (New
York: Schocken Books, 1974), p. 30

“In tracing the continuous tradition of the Law from Moses to the days of Shammai and Hillel—
[1] Moses, [2] Joshua, the [3] elders, the prophets,--the Pirke Abot has, ‘[4] The prophets
transmitted it to the men of the [5] Great Synagogue.’ The last in the prophetic succession were
Haggai and Zechariah, who had a leading part in the rebuilding of the temple, and Malachi,
whom the Jews made a contemporary of the other two. These were the link between their
predecessors in the prophetic tradition and the Great Synagogue. . . . ‘Haggai, Zechariah, and
Malachi received the tradition from the prophets; the men of the Great Synagogue received it
from Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.’” (George Foot Moore, Judaism, volume 1, p. 31)

The question is, how did the men of the Great Synagogue pass on these traditions to the
succeeding generations? Moore answers:

“Ezra and the Men of the Great Synagogue were believed to have introduced these institutions
and regulations by ordinances having the force of law, as their successors, the Soferim, and the
Rabbis who succeeded them did.” (George Foot Moore, Judaism, volume 1, p. 33)

Thus, in the minds of the compilers of the Talmud, the process of unbroken transmission was
complete: [1] Moses, [2] Joshua, [3] Elders, Prophets, the men of the Great Synagogue [of which
Ezra was the originator, according to the Jewish interpretation of Ezra 7:11-12], Soferim or later
elders and finally the Rabbis.

Moore underlines the fact that ‘to be of any use such a chain of tradition must possess unbroken
continuity.” (George Foot Moore, Judaism, p. 35)

A Living Teaching Office

But there was one more element in the view of Tradition that was upheld by the Scribes and the
Pharisees. It was not sufficient to have a deposit of tradition and a transmitting agent. It was also
necessary, according to the Pharisees, to have a living voice or teaching office (the word ‘rabbi’
means ‘teacher’) in each generation to authoritatively interpret, explain, draw forth and apply
the Tradition to contemporary life.

Thus it was not sufficient to have a [1] deposit of written and oral tradition and for this tradition
to [2] have been passed on authentically from generation to generation. Also needed was a [3]
living interpreter who could define what was a genuine tradition and what was not.

According to Simon this idea of the transmission of oral tradition:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 214 of 369
“. . . made Pharisaism the living element of official Judaism. It was the tradition that allowed the
Pharisees to justify all the elaborations that they introduced regarding the scriptural precepts, on
the level of observances as well as on the level of doctrine.” (Simon, pp. 35-36)
Thus the Scribes and the Pharisees became the authoritative living interpreter of both the
written Torah and the oral traditions which had been handed down from previous generations.

Oral Tradition More Reliable

Moore also points out that these regulations of oral law came to be venerated even more than
the written Revelation:

“The distinction between the ordinances and decrees of the Scribes (Soferim) and the biblical law
is constantly made in the juristic literature but the authority of the Scribes or the Learned to make
such regulations was not questioned, nor was the transgression or neglect of their rules a venial
offense. On the contrary, a more serious matter is made of the words of the Scribes than of the
words of the (written) law.” (George Foot Moore, Judaism, volume 1, pp. 33-34)

The Voice of God

In the same vein, Dr. Geike in his excellent work, Life and Words of Jesus, states:

“From their pupils the rabbis demanded the most profound reverence. ‘The honor,’ says the
Talmud, ‘due to a teacher borders on that due to God [very similar to Roman Catholicism]’ . . . .
The common discourse of a rabbi was to be reverenced as much as the law. To dispute with one,
or to murmur against him, was a crime as great as to do the same toward the Almighty. Their
WORDS must be received as WORDS OF THE LIVING GOD.” (Quoted in, E. J. Hibbard, The Two
Laws: Object Function and Duration of Each (Mountain View, California, reprinted in 1989 by
Leaves of Autumn), p. 46.

The teachings of the rabbis were also reckoned practically infallible as we can see from the
following quotation also from Dr. Geike:

“It was a principle universally accepted that ‘the sayings of the scribes were weightier than those
of the law.’ The transmission of the as-yet-unwritten opinions of former rabbis--forming an ever-
growing mass of tradition--was the special aim of the rabbis of each age. . . . Once uttered, a
rabbi’s words remained LAW FOREVER [unchangeable and infallible], though they might be
explained away and virtually ignored while affected to be followed.” (Quoted in, E. J. Hibbard,
The Two Laws: Object, Function and Duration of Each (Mountain View, California, reprinted in
1989 by Leaves of Autumn), p. 46

The role of this teaching office, however, went far beyond just explaining and applying the oral
and written revelation to everyday life.

The rabbis frequently brought forth religious practices and beliefs which were not implicitly and
much less explicitly contained in the written revelation. When they did this, were they claiming
to bring forth new truth not previously revealed by God? Not at all! They taught that these truths

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 215 of 369
were part of the deposit of unwritten traditions which God had previously revealed to Moses.
They believed that though these traditions had not previously been brought to light, they had
been preserved in the deposit Tradition which had been handed down from generation to
generation. In other words, the rabbis believed that they were merely bringing these truths to
light or discovering them in the deposit of oral tradition.

The Issue of Authority to Teach

This brings us to the issue of authority. The Pharisees believed that only an elite cadre of carefully
trained theological experts guided by God could bring to light, explain, interpret and apply the
written Scriptures as well as the unwritten traditions.

This was what Jesus was speaking to when He remarked in Matthew 23:2 that the Pharisees ‘sit
on Moses’ cathedra.’ Concerning the meaning of this expression, the Roman Catholic Jerome
Bible Commentary states:

“The phrase is most probably a metaphor for the authority of the scribes to teach. In rabbinical
tradition the interpretation of the Law was carried on in a scribal tradition that theoretically went
back through an unbroken chain of scribes to Moses. This view is, of course, entirely
unhistorical.” (The Jerome Bible Commentary, volume 2 (New York: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1968), p.
102)

When the Pharisees and Scribes spoke ex-cathedra, that is, ‘from (Moses’) the throne,’ their
word was to be accepted as final. The general populace was required to accept these rabbinical
views and interpretations and to obey them without question. Thus the genuine meaning of
both the written Scriptures and the unwritten traditions could only be determined by the rabbis
and the general populace had no say in the matter! Concerning this, George Foot Moore
remarks:

“Learning is the privilege of leisure. Husbandmen and artisans are the support of the social
structure, but, wholly occupied as they must be in their several callings and often highly expert in
them, they have no time for the wide-ranging studies that make the scholar. They are therefore
not qualified to be called to the council or to take the lead in the assembly; they cannot sit on the
judge’s bench, for they do not understand the principles of the law, and cannot bring out the
rights of the case and a just judgment. Different is the case of the man who gives his whole mind
to it, and concentrates his thought on the law of the Most High. He will seek out the wisdom of
all the ancients and occupy himself with the study of the prophecies, and pay attention to
expositions of famous men, and will penetrate into the elusive turns of parables. He will search
out the hidden meaning of proverbs, and will be versed in the enigmas of parables.” (George Foot
Moore, Judaism, volume 1, pp. 40-41)

In this way the religious leaders had absolute control over every person and sphere of public
and private life. Whoever questioned the opinion or authority of the rabbis was in danger of
being cast out of the synagogue, as we can see from the story of the man who was born blind
(John 9:22)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 216 of 369
Jesus spoke to this problem in Matthew 23:13 when He accused the Scribes and Pharisees of
closing the kingdom of heaven to men as well as to themselves:

"But woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven
against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.”

What Jesus meant by this is found in the parallel passage of Luke 11:52 where He accused the
doctors of the law of taking away the key of knowledge which would have opened the door to
the kingdom of heaven both to them and to the people:

"Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge. You did not enter in
yourselves, and those who were entering in you hindered."

Stranglehold on the People

Jesus’ rebuke of the Scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23 had the intention of breaking the
stranglehold which they had over the people. George Foot Moore writes about the influence
which the Scribes and Pharisees had on the people:

“The Scribes, on the other hand, had the support of the Pharisaean party, to which many of them
belonged. The Pharisees in turn had the people behind them, and with the growing importance
of the synagogue, the professionally educated class gained increasing influence as the teachers
of the people.” (George Foot Moore, Judaism, volume 1, p. 43)

Flavius Josephus adds this testimony:

“The Pharisees have delivered to the common people by tradition from a continuous succession
of fathers certain legal regulations which are not written in the Law of Moses, on which account
the Sadducean sort rejects them, affirming that what is written is to be regarded as law, but what
comes from the tradition of the fathers is not to be observed. On this point the Pharisees have
the mass of the people on their side, and they have so much influence that anything they say,
even against a king or a high priest, finds ready credence.” (Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the
Jews, xvii.2.4, paragraph 41)

Ellen White concurs with this in the following words:

“The interest of the people in Christ and His work had steadily increased. They were charmed with
His teaching, but they were also greatly perplexed. They had respected the priests and rabbis for
their intelligence and apparent piety. In all religious matters they had ever yielded implicit
obedience to their authority. Yet they now saw these men trying to cast discredit upon Jesus, a
teacher whose virtue and knowledge shone forth the brighter from every assault. . . . Through
their reverence for tradition and their blind faith in a corrupt priesthood, the people were
enslaved.” (Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, p. 611, 612)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 217 of 369
Scholarship in Christ’s Day

From the extant sources we know that much of the scholarship in Christ’s day consisted in
quoting from what previous rabbis and fathers had said about Scripture and tradition rather than
from the Scripture itself. Thus the opinions of men took the place of the Word of God. Regarding
the teaching method of the rabbis Ellen White makes this telling statement:

“The teaching of the scribes and the Pharisees was a continuous repetition of fables and childish
traditions. Their opinions and ceremonies rested on the authority of ancient maxims and
rabbinical sayings which were frivolous and worthless. Christ did not dwell on weak and insipid
saying and theories of men.” (Ellen G. White, The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, ‘The Word
of God,’ August 22, 1907)

She states further:

“The teaching of the scribes and elders was cold and formal, like a lesson learned by rote. They
explained the law as a matter of custom, but no authority from God sanctified their utterances,
no holy inspiration stirred their own hearts and those of their hearers.” (Ellen G. White, The Spirit
of Prophecy, volume 2, p. 176)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 218 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #15 – A CASE STUDY: MARK 7:1-13

Review

In our last study together I read a series of quotations from Flavius Josephus, Marcel Simon and
George Foot Moore on the Jewish concept of tradition in the times of Jesus. The Jews in the days
of Christ believed in:

 A deposit of Tradition which was composed of the writings of Moses and the unwritten
oral traditions
 A transmitting mechanism to pass on in a trustworthy manner from generation to
generation the writings of Moses and the unwritten traditions. This required an unbroken
succession of religious scholars who kept the Tradition pure.
 An authoritative, authentic living teaching office in each generation composed of
professional scholars who could, infallibly explain, apply, amplify and bring forth from
the deposit of Tradition the truths that were found in the writings of Moses and the
unwritten traditions
 The key words are ‘tradition’, ‘receive’, ‘pass on’ ‘hold’
 Talmud in Aboth [“the Fathers”] 1:1-2 describes the process of transmission:

“[1] Moses received the Law from Sinai and committed it to [2] Joshua, and Joshua to the [3]
elders, and the elders to the [4] Prophets; and the Prophets committed it to the men of the [5]
Great Synagogue [after the Captivity].”
Verses 3-13 then affirm that the men of the Great Synagogue passed the Tradition by an unbroken
succession of scholars from Simeon the Just in the days of Ezra to Shammai and Hillel in the days of Christ

Today we will study a passage in the gospel of Mark where this view of tradition is vividly
described - Mark 7:1-13. Here is the passage with certain key expression emphasized:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 219 of 369
Mark 7:1-13

“Then the Pharisees and some of the scribes came together to Him, having come from Jerusalem.
2 Now when they saw some of His disciples eat bread with defiled, that is, with unwashed hands,

they found fault. 3 For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands in a
special way, holding the tradition of the elders. 4 When they come from the marketplace, they
do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other things which they have received and hold,
like the washing of cups, pitchers, copper vessels, and couches. 5 Then the Pharisees and scribes
asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread
with unwashed hands?" 6 He answered and said to them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you
hypocrites, as it is written: 'This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. 7
And in vain they worship teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' 8 For laying aside
the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men — the washing of pitchers and cups,
and many other such things you do." 9 He said to them, "All too well you reject the commandment
of God, that you may keep your tradition. 10 For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother';
and, 'He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.' 11 But you say, 'If a man says to
his father or mother: "Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban"—'(that is, a
gift to God), 12 then you no longer let him do anything for his father or his mother, 13 making the
word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such
things you do."

Technical Terminology

We are immediately struck by the technical terminology we have already found in rabbinical
sources:
 ‘Holding to the Tradition of the elders’ (7:3)
 ‘Which they have received to hold’ (7:4)
 ‘Tradition of the elders’ (7: 5)
 ‘hold the tradition of men (7:8)
 ‘your tradition’ (7:9)
 ‘tradition which you have handed down’ (7:13)

The word ‘received’ indicates a process of transmission from previous generations as does the
word ‘tradition’. In fact, the word ‘tradition’ is used only in the singular in this passage indicating
that we are dealing here with a single body or deposit of tradition of which the ceremonial
washing of hands is only one element.
The word ‘hold’ also indicates the existence of a deposit which they preserved in their day from
previous generations.
A Group of Spies

Mark 1:
“Then the Pharisees and some of the scribes came together to Him, having come from Jerusalem.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 220 of 369
Why did these religious leaders come from Jerusalem to where Christ was teaching?
Review and Herald March 8, 1898:
“This deputation was sent from Jerusalem for the express purpose of watching Jesus, that
something might be found with which to accuse him.”
It is important to identify who these religious leaders were and what their motivation was.
Jesus made it clear that these religious leaders relished the recognition their position accorded
them. Their religion consisted mainly of externals—with the intention of impressing the
populace. According to Jesus they enjoyed being called ‘rabbi’ (Matthew 23:7) and ‘father.’
Regarding this, Jesus warned that the people should call no one on earth their ‘father.’ (Matthew
23:9). Jesus also accused them of devouring the material possessions of the widows (Matthew
23:14) and of reciting long repetitious prayers learned by rote (Matthew 6:5, 6; 23:14). He also
rebuked them for showing off their piety and generosity in giving alms to the poor (Matthew
6:1-2).

The Issue: Ritual Cleansing

Mark 7:2:
“Now when they saw some of His disciples eat bread with defiled, that is, with unwashed hands,
they found fault.”
The issue here is not hygiene. It is obvious that for health reasons, people should wash their
hands before they eat. The point of conflict here is over ritual or ceremonial cleansing which
required a tedious process of multiple ablutions. Were these washings required by the written
Torah? No! The next verse tells us where the practice came from.
Regarding the nature of the conflict in Mark 7 we are told in The Desire of Ages, p. 395:

“As before, the ground of complaint was His disregard of the traditional precepts that
encumbered the law of God. These were professedly designed to guard the observance of the
law, but they were regarded as more sacred than the law itself. When they came in collision with
the commandments given from Sinai, preference was given to the rabbinical precepts.”

Mark 7:3:
“For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands in a special way,
holding the tradition of the elders.”
We see clearly that the practice did not come from the written Scriptures but rather from the
tradition of the elders.
Mark 7:4:
“When they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many
other things which they have received and hold [grasp firmly or to hold fast so as not to let go],
like the washing of cups, pitchers, copper vessels, and couches.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 221 of 369
The Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament explains the perceived source of these
regulations:
“The absolute authority of the tradition is guaranteed primarily by its unbroken derivation from
Moses and even from God himself (°Abot 1.1)”
Three times in the passage we are told that the issue is much broader than just ritual cleansing.
It really involves ‘many other such like things’ (Mark 7:4, 8, 13). In other words, this specific
conflict is only the tip of the iceberg.
Rigorous Casuistry

Not only from Mark 7 but also from passages such as Matthew 23 we know that the rabbis had
developed a system of rigorous casuistry which became so burdensome and oppressive that no
one could obey it. Regarding this Ellen White remarks:

‘The requirements had become so complicated that it was impossible for them to be fulfilled.’
(Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, p. 617)

No dimension of life escaped their prescriptions and proscriptions. Most often the rabbinical
regulations majored in minors and minored in the ‘weightier matters of the law.’ (Matthew
5:20; 23:23; 23:16-22). Jesus spoke of these burdens too heavy to bear in Matthew 23:4.

Marcel Simon remarks about this oppressive casuistry:

“. . . the code of the Torah [writings of Moses], which regulated both the individual and the
collective life of the Jews, did not make provision for every possible situation. This was the task of
the doctors of the law and their students. In the light of sacred Scripture, they were to fix the
conduct to be followed in each individual case. The Pharisees’ casuistry balanced on the edge of
formalism, and sometimes fell over into it. It seems to us to have been overly meticulous and
hairsplitting in the extreme. When we read of discussion on minute points, of quibbles, and of
distinctions bordering on the ludicrous, we sometimes feel that we are in the presence of a sterile
form of mental gymnastics.” Marcel Simon, Jewish Sects, p. 32

Ellen White is in agreement with Simon:

“They occupied men’s minds with trifling distinctions and turned their attention from essential
truths. Among other things the people were required to strain all the water used, lest it should
contain the smallest insect, which might be classed with the unclean animals. Jesus, contrasting
these trivial exactions with the magnitude of their actual sins, said to the Pharisees, ‘Ye blind
guides, which strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.’” Ellen White, The Desire of Ages, p. 617

Mark 5:
“Then the Pharisees and scribes asked Him, "Why do Your disciples not walk according to the
tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashed hands?"

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 222 of 369
Regarding the meaning of the expression ‘tradition of the elders’, the Roman Catholic Jerome
Bible Commentary says:
“A rabbinical term for the body of unwritten laws that the Pharisees considered as equally
binding as the written Torah” (The Jerome Bible Commentary, volume 1, ‘The Gospel According
Mark’, 42:42, p. 36)
“When Christ came to this world He found the Jewish people burdened with a heavy weight of
traditions and ceremonies which the religious teachers had handed down from generation to
generation. So great was the mass of tradition brought in that the commandments of God were
made of none effect.” Manuscript Releases, volume 20, p. 338
“Many of the Jewish traditions were of so trifling and worthless a character as to cheapen their
whole religion, and these traditions were handed down from generation to generation, and were
regarded by many as the word of God. Human inventions, which were constantly becoming more
foolish and inconsistent, were placed on an equality with the moral law, until at the time of
Christ's first advent, pure doctrine had given place to false ideas.” Signs of the Times, January 3,
1900
The fact that the Scribes and Pharisees expected Jesus to compel His disciples to obey the
tradition of the elders indicates that this tradition had the force of law (Mark 7:5). The rabbis
were expected to compel their disciples to obey this tradition by precept and example.

Jesus Confronts the Leaders

The way Jesus faced this conflict is significant. He quoted the written Word of God three times.

The first quotation comes from Isaiah 29:13. Here Jesus provides a vivid description of religion
of the scribes and Pharisees:

Mark 6:

“He answered and said to them, ‘Well did Isaiah prophesy [Isaiah 29:13] of you hypocrites, as it
is written: 'This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me.”

The text in Isaiah 29:13 continues:

“. . . and their fear toward Me is taught by the commandment of men. . .”

Jesus interprets this text in an interesting way. He links the idea of fear with worship. In
Revelation 14:6, 7 the words ‘fear’ and ‘worship’ are linked together. The word ‘fear’ refers to a
deep and reverent respect that leads us to worship God.

Mark 7:

“‘And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”

 The issue in the passage is crystal clear. The battle is between the written word of God

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 223 of 369
 and the unwritten tradition of men.
 Even more specifically the conflict is between the commandments of God and the
traditions of men.
 Finally, the conflict is over true worship and vain worship
 Are these the very issues that will divide the world into two groups at the end of time?
The book of Revelation indicates clearly that the final conflict will revolve around the
commandments and worship (Revelation 12:17; 14:6, 7, 9-11). We will further pursue this
thought in a future lecture in this series.

According to Jesus, to teach the commandments of men in place of the word of God constitutes
vain worship. In other words, when we follow the commandments of men instead of the word
of God our worship is empty, useless and pointless.

Though Jesus did not quote Isaiah 29:14 it is loaded with meaning because it reveals that the
traditions of men came from the so called wise men and prudent men of Israel, in other words,
from the scholars:

“Therefore, behold, I will again do a marvelous work among this people, a marvelous work and a
wonder; for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent
men shall be hidden."

Mark 8:

“For [your worship is vain because] laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition
of men—the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do."

Notice the contrast is between the commandment of God and the tradition of men which
contradicts the commandment of God
Mark 9:

“He said to them, "All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your
tradition

Once again the contrast is between the commandment [singular] of God and your tradition.

A Living Example

Ellen White explained the law of Corban (which means, ‘dedicated’)

“An undutiful child had only to pronounce the word "Corban" over his property, thus devoting it
to God, and he could retain it for his own use during his lifetime, and after his death it was to be
appropriated to the temple service. Thus he was at liberty, both in life and in death, to dishonor
and defraud his parents, under cover of a pretended devotion to God.” DA, p. 396

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 224 of 369
Mark 10:

“For Moses [by whose authority they claimed to teach while sitting on the Cathedra of Moses]
said [written Scripture], 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who curses father or
mother, let him be put to death. [Exodus 21:17]'”

This second quotation that Jesus used comes from Exodus 20:12: “Honor your father and your
mother.”

Here Jesus actually quotes the fifth commandment of God’s holy Ten Commandment Law. Thus
their tradition of Corban contradicted the Law of God.

The third quotation is from Exodus 21:17 where Moses said:

"And he who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.”

The purpose of the second and third quotations is to prove that the commandments of men
which come from the deposit of unwritten Tradition really conflict with the written
commandments of God which come from the deposit of the written Word of God. The Scribes
and Pharisees claimed to teach by the authority of Moses and yet they contradict what Moses
wrote!

Jesus, in unmistakable language, shows that the tradition of Corban which is found in the body
of unwritten tradition, not only conflicts with the fifth commandment of the written law of God
but actually abolishes it!!

Mark 11-12:

“But you say [notice the contrast], 'If a man says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you
might have received from me is Corban"—' (that is, a gift to God), 12 then you no longer let him
do anything for his father or his mother.”

Closing Argument

Mark 7:13

“. . . making the word of God of no effect through your tradition [not God’s word] which you have
handed down. And many such things you do."

Reaction of the Religious Leaders

The logic of Jesus was impeccable and could not be refuted. They hated Jesus because he came
at them with the written word and with the Ten Commandments and showed that their
traditions contradicted the word of God and the Ten Commandments (will this happen at the
end as well?). Notice that because Jesus stood upon the written word of God and not upon
tradition he was despised by the religious leaders. (Does this sound familiar?):

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 225 of 369
“The deputies from Jerusalem were filled with rage. They could not accuse Christ as a violator of
the law given from Sinai, for He spoke as its defender against their traditions. The great precepts
of the law, which He had presented, appeared in striking contrast to the petty rules that men had
devised.” The Desire of Ages, p. 397

Because Jesus required proof from Scripture, the religious leaders turned the people against Him
and eventually led them to seek His destruction. In a very real sense, what led the Jews to reject
Christ was their view of tradition. This will happen at the end of time as well.

“The law of God unmixed with human tradition was presented by Christ as the great standard of
obedience. This aroused the enmity of the rabbis. They had set human teaching above God's
word, and had turned the people away from His precepts. They would not give up their man-made
commandments in order to obey the requirements of the word of God. They would not, for the
truth's sake, sacrifice the pride of reason and the praise of men. When Christ came, presenting to
the nation the claims of God, the priests and elders denied His right to interpose between them
and the people. They would not accept His rebukes and warnings, and they set themselves to turn
the people against Him and to compass His destruction. Ellen G. White, Christ Object Lessons, pp.
304, 305

“They [the Pharisees] presumed to make nice distinctions as to the comparative guilt of various
sins, passing over some lightly, and treating others of perhaps less consequence as unpardonable.
For a money consideration, they excused persons from their vows. And for large sums of money
they sometimes passed over aggravated crimes. At the same time these priests and rulers would
in other cases pronounce severe judgment for trivial offenses.” Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages,
p. 616

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 226 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #16 – JESUS AND THEOLOGICAL CONFLICT

Introduction

This morning we sang A Mighty Fortress is our God which has come to be known as the Battle
Hymn of the Protestant Reformation. Every time I sing this hymn (which is a paraphrase of Psalm
46) I can almost see Martin Luther standing before Emperor Charles V and the luminaries of the
Roman Catholic Church at the Diet of Worms with a face like flint and refusing to recant his
teachings. In his own words:

". . . my conscience is captive by the Word of God. Therefore I cannot and will not recant, since it
is difficult, unprofitable and dangerous indeed to do anything against one's conscience. So help
me God. Amen."

Protestantism and Catholicism

If there is one word that epitomized the Protestant Reformation, it is the word: SOLA

 Sola Gracia (grace alone)

 Solo Christo (Christ alone)
 Sola Fide (faith alone)
 Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone)
 Soli Deo Gloria (God’s glory alone)

In contrast to the motto of the Protestant reformers, the Catholic Church was and is
characterized by the three-letter word AND:
 Grace and human effort
 Christ and Mary
 Faith and works
 Glory to God and to the holy ones who achieved sainthood by their good works
 Scripture and tradition

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 227 of 369
Ellen White has explained the meaning of Sola Scriptura:

The Great Controversy, p. 595: “But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible,
and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of
learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, as
numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority--
not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith.
Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain "Thus saith the Lord" in its
support.”

Immediately after this statement Ellen White explains how religious leaders are able to control
their members:

The Great Controversy, p. 595: “Satan is constantly endeavoring to attract attention to man in
the place of God. He leads the people to look to bishops, to pastors, to professors of theology, as
their guides, instead of searching the Scriptures to learn their duty for themselves. Then, by
controlling the minds of these leaders, he can influence the multitudes according to his will.”

The truth of these statements is confirmed by our great exemplar, Jesus Christ. If the religious
leaders of Christ’s day had not interposed the world would have seen the greatest revival ever:

“If the priests and rabbis had not interposed, His teaching would have wrought such a reformation
as this world has never witnessed.” The Desire of Ages, p. 205

How did Jesus face and settle theological controversies that he had with the ministers and
theologians of His day? Did he ever appeal to tradition or quote the great scholars?

The Authority of Jesus

As far as we know, not even once did Jesus ever quote a rabbi or scholar as an authority. It is a
well-known fact that Jesus did not attend the schools of the rabbis. He was home schooled. In
this way He remained undefiled by the traditions of the scholars.

Concerning His childhood education, we are told in The Story of Jesus, p. 30:

“God Himself by His Holy Spirit instructed Mary how to bring up His Son. Mary taught Jesus from
the Holy Scriptures and He learned to read and study them for Himself.”

The Spirit of Prophecy explains that His mother, in order to prevent controversy, attempted to
convince Jesus to follow the traditions of the elders but Jesus would have none of it. He always
appealed to the clear statements of written Scripture:

Signs of the Times, August 6, 1896: “When the priests and rulers came to Mary to persuade her
to force Jesus to give allegiance to their ceremonies and traditions, she felt much troubled. But
peace and confidence came to her troubled heart as her Son presented the clear statements of
the Scriptures in upholding His practices.”
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 228 of 369
Thus, whenever Jesus defended his teachings or his actions, He always appealed to the written
words of the Old Testament. Though He was aware of the traditions of the rabbis, He never
approvingly quoted any of these supposed oral sayings of Moses or the fathers.
Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, pp. 446, 447: “Jesus and John were represented by
the educators of that day as ignorant because they had not learned in the schools of the rabbis;
but the God of heaven was their Teacher and all who heard were astonished at their knowledge of
the Scriptures.”
From the time of his first visit to the temple, Jesus appealed to the written word of God.
Regarding this incident, Ellen White remarks:
The Desire of Ages, p. 85: “In every gentle and submissive way, Jesus tried to please those with
whom He came in contact. Because He was so gentle and unobtrusive, the scribes and elders
supposed that He would be easily influenced by their teaching. They urged Him to receive the
maxims and traditions that had been handed down from the ancient rabbis, but He asked for their
authority in Holy writ. He would hear every word that proceeds from the mouth of God; but He
could not obey the inventions of men. Jesus seemed to know the Scriptures from beginning to end
and He presented them in their true import. The rabbis were ashamed to be instructed by a child.
They claimed that it was their office to explain the Scriptures and that it was His place to accept
their interpretation. They were indignant that He should stand in opposition to their word.”

The Temptation

Jesus set the tone at the very beginning of His ministry. When Jesus was tempted of the devil,
four times His defense was, ‘it is written’
Matthew 4:3-10: God had just said that Jesus was His Beloved Son at the baptism and now
Satan came with doubt and Jesus detected him right away!
Temptation #1:
“Now when the tempter came to Him [as an angel of light], he said: "If You are the Son of God,
command that these stones become bread." 4 But He answered and said, "It is written, 'Man shall
not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God'" (verses 3, 4)
Temptation #2:

“Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, 6 and said to
Him, "If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written: 'He shall give His angels
charge over you, [he omitted the words: ‘to keep Thee in all Thy ways’. Satan quoted the promise
without the condition upon which God could fulfill the promise] 'and, 'In their hands they shall
bear you up, lest you dash your foot against a stone.'" 7 Jesus said to him, "It is written again:
'You shall not tempt the Lord your God [God had said that Jesus was His Son and to demand proof
would show a lack of faith] (verses 5-7).
Temptation #3: Satan now reveals his true identity.
“Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms
of the world and their glory. 9 And he said to Him, "All these things I will give You if You will fall

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 229 of 369
down and worship me." 10 Then Jesus said to him, "Away with you, Satan! For it is written, 'You
shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve'" (verses 8-10).

Beginning of His Ministry

When Jesus began His public ministry He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath day, turned to
the book of Isaiah, chapter 61:1, 2, read the passage and then said:
Luke 4:21:
‘This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears’

The Writings of Moses

John 5:45-47: Jesus affirmed that Moses wrote about Him.

“Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you — Moses, in
whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. 47
But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"

Mark 7
In my last sermon we studied Mark 7 and found that Jesus quoted three Scriptures to contradict
their tradition:
Isaiah 29:13: “These people honor me with their lips but their heart is far from me” and “In vain
do they worship me teaching as precepts the commandments of men.”
Exodus 20:12 “Honor your father and your mother”
Exodus 21: “He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death”

The Great Commandment in the Law

A certain young scholar came to test Jesus by asking what he needed to do to inherit eternal life.
Jesus answered:
Luke 10:26: ‘What is written in the law [this would be the Torah]? How do you read?’ The young
man quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 and Leviticus 19:18 to which Jesus said:
“You have answered correctly, do this and you will live.”

Two Witnesses

The enemies of Jesus came to Him and said: “Your testimony is not valid because you are your
own witness and the testimony of one witness cannot confirm any word.”

Jesus answered their objection with the written word:

John 8:17, 18: “It is also written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. 18 I am One
who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me."
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 230 of 369
Sabbath Conflict

Matthew 12:3-5: Jesus used the example of David in the written word to defend His style of
Sabbath observance
“But He said to them, "Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those
who were with him: 4 how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not
lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? 5 Or have you
not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are
blameless?”

Dispute over Marriage

Matthew 19:4-6: When a dispute over divorce surfaced, Jesus resolved the issue by referring to
the written Sriptures
“And He answered and said to them, "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning
'made them male and female,' 5 and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother
and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? 6 So then, they are no longer two
but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

Triumphal Entry

Matthew 21:16: When the Pharisees commanded Jesus to rebuke those who were praising Him
at the Triumphal Entry, Jesus justified their behavior by quoting Scripture:
“And Jesus said to them, "Yes. Have you never read, 'Out of the mouth of babes and nursing infants
you have perfected praise'?"

Cleansing the Temple

His cleansing of the temple was justified by the written Word:

Matthew 21:13:
“And He said to them, "It is written, 'My house shall be called a house of prayer,' but you have
made it a 'den of thieves.'"
When any religious dispute was to be settled, Jesus quoted from the written Word, never from
tradition!

The Vineyard Workers

After telling the parable of the vineyard workers, Jesus asked the religious leaders:
“What will the father do to those who threw the son out of the vineyard and killed him?”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 231 of 369
They answered:
“He will destroy those wicked men miserably, and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who
will render to him the fruits in their seasons."
Then Jesus quoted Scripture to prove that they were the vinedressers:
Matthew 21:42:
‘Did ye never read in the Scriptures, ‘The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become
the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes?’

Dispute over the Resurrection

Jesus had a dispute with the Sadducees who did not believe in the resurrection of the dead. They
presented to Him an imaginary scenario: There were seven brothers and one of them married a
certain woman. He died and his brother married his wife. All seven of them died after having
married the same woman. Whose wife would she be in the resurrection?
Mark 12:24-27
“Jesus answered and said to them, "Are you not therefore mistaken, because you do not know the
Scriptures nor the power of God [the Scriptures teach the resurrection and God has the power to
resurrect dead people]? 25 For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in
marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 26 But concerning the dead, that they rise, have you not
read in the book of Moses, in the burning bush passage, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the
God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? 27 He is not the God of the dead
[because he will resurrect Abraham Isaac and Jacob], but the God of the living. You are therefore
greatly mistaken."

The Son of David

While Jesus was in the temple for the last time he had several discussions with the religious
leaders:
Matt 22:41-45: “While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 saying, "What
do you think about the Christ [Messiah]? Whose Son is He?" They said to Him, "The Son of
David." 43 He said to them, "How then does David in the Spirit call Him 'Lord,' saying [quoting
Psalm 110:1]: 44 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your
footstool"'? 45 If David then calls Him 'Lord,' how is He his Son?"
If David calls his son Lord, then the son has to be greater than David and cannot be David’s
literal son.

After the Resurrection

After His resurrection Jesus explained His mission to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus by
quoting from the written Scriptures.
Luke 24:25-27: The Disciples on the Road to Emmaus.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 232 of 369
“Then He said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have
spoken! 26 Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?" 27 And
beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things
concerning Himself.”
Luke 24:44-47: The apostles in the Upper Room.
"These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled
which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me." 45
And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. 46 Then He said
to them, "Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the
dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name
to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”

People Wonder at Jesus’ Teaching

The people were constantly wondering where Jesus had gotten His knowledge, not having
studied under any of the great rabbis:
Matthew 13:54:

“When He had come to His own country [Nazareth], He taught them in their synagogue, so that
they were astonished and said, "Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works?”
John 7:14,15:
“Now about the middle of the feast [of Tabernacles] Jesus went up into the temple and taught. 15
And the Jews marveled, saying, "How does this Man know letters, having never studied?"
John 7:45, 46:
“Then the officers came to the chief priests and Pharisees, who said to them, "Why have you not
brought Him?" 46 The officers answered: "No man ever spoke like this Man!"

Authority of Jesus Questioned

The right or authority of Jesus to act and speak was constantly questioned by the Scribes and
Pharisees:
Mark 11:27, 28:
‘And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the
chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders, and say unto him: 28 By what authority doest thou
these things? And who gave thee this authority to do these things?’
It is clear here that the religious leaders believed that the right to teach was an authority which
belonged to them alone and which they alone could delegate.
After telling the Story of the man who built his house on the rock and the man who built his house
on the sand we find the following words:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 233 of 369
Matthew 7:28, 29: ‘And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were
astonished at his doctrine; 29 for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.’

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 234 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #17 – THE ROMAN CATHOLIC

VIEW OF TRADITION - Part 1

Review

In our study of the rabbinical concept of divine revelation we have noticed that there were
certain key concepts and terms:

‘Tradition’
‘handed down’
‘passed on’
‘received’
‘hold’
‘unbroken succession’
Implicit obedience of the people
Religious leaders sat on Moses’ Cathedra

In our study today we are going to see that there is a striking similarity between the rabbinical
view of tradition in the apostate Jewish church in the days of Christ and that of the apostate
Roman Catholic Church of today.

Unbiblical Doctrines and Practices

Have you ever wondered how the Roman Catholic Church can justify beliefs and practices
which do not have even one iota of support in the written Scriptures?

Where, for example, is the written Biblical evidence for infant baptism, baptism by sprinkling,
prayers for the dead and to the dead, the canonization of saints, purgatory, limbo, the celibacy
of the priesthood, the sale of indulgences, the worship of images, the rosary, the immaculate
conception, Mary as mediatrix, Mary as the mother of God, the assumption of Mary, the
perpetual virginity of Mary, the observance of Sunday, Lent, auricular confession, among other
things? The answer is found in the Roman Catholic view of tradition.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 235 of 369
Things not Written
The Roman Catholic view of Tradition is virtually identical with that of the Jews in the time of
Christ. However, instead of God giving the information to Moses the Roman Catholic Church
says that Christ gave the oral information to Peter who presided over the college of the apostles.

Roman Catholic scholars underline the fact there were many teachings and actions of Jesus
which were never recorded in the Gospels. This much is true for we are told explicitly told in
John 21:25 and 20:30-31 that Jesus said and did many things which were not written in the
Gospel of John.

But nowhere are we told in the New Testament that God intended to pass on orally from
generation to generation the things that were not written. The Roman Catholic Church teaches
that Peter and the apostles preserved these oral traditions absolutely pure and passed them on
orally and infallibly to their successors.

These successors in turn preserved all of these oral traditions and transmitted them with 100%
inerrancy to the next generation and the next to the next in unbroken succession to our very
day.

The Roman Catholic Church employs Matthew 16:18, 19 to support this view. They say that
Christ built His church upon Peter, the rock, and then gave him the keys of the kingdom to bind
and loose.

What this means in Roman Catholic theology, is that Peter presiding over the college of the
apostles, was given the authority to preserve, define and explain, not only the written Word of
God but also the unwritten Tradition.

Unbroken Chain of Successors

Notably, according to Roman Catholic theology, when the Pope in union with the college of
bishops, speaks on faith and morals, he speaks ex-cathedra, that is, from Peter’s throne and thus
his teachings have infallible apostolic authority.

How it Works
Let’s put this in practical terms. The Roman Catholic Church believes that there is a [1] deposit
of revelation which is contained in the written Scriptures of the New Testament and in the
unwritten Tradition that was given orally to Peter. They also believe that there is a [2]
transmitting element to pass on divine revelation from generation to generation in an
authoritative and trustworthy way. This transmitting mechanism is known as apostolic
succession where one generation of bishops places their hands in ordination upon the next
generation of bishops in unbroken succession from the time of Peter till our day.

The Teaching Office or Magisterium

But, according to Roman Catholic theology, there must also be an authoritative living voice in the
church in every generation to bring forth, define, explain, interpret and amplify Tradition both
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 236 of 369
in its written and unwritten form. This is done by the Magisterium or teaching office of the church,
an elite cadre of scholars especially trained for the task.

We can immediately see the striking similarity between this Roman Catholic view and the Jewish
concept in Christ’s day. They are virtually identical.

Implicit and Unquestioning Obedience

According to Roman Catholic theology, when the Pope speaks ex-cathedra, that is, from Peter’s
throne, his pronouncements must be accepted as final and infallible. That is to say, the faithful
must render implicit obedience to the will of the Pope and the Magisterium under pain of being
anathema or excommunicated!

This is, as we have seen, precisely what was expected of the populace in the days of Christ. This
is the way in which the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church exerts full and total control over
the masses and governs them according to its will.

You say: “Where is the evidence that the Roman Catholic Church believes this?”

The clear evidence is found in the official declaration of the Roman Catholic Church on divine
revelation at Vatican Council II and also in The Catechism of the Catholic Church. But before
we turn to these sources let’s examine what was taught at the Council of Trent.

The Council of Trent

The Council of Trent was celebrated from 1545-1563 and had the express purpose of arresting the
growing Protestant Reformation. The Council had some very definite things to say about divine
revelation:

“The sacred and holy, ecumenical, and general Synod of Trent,--lawfully assembled in the Holy
Ghost,--seeing clearly that this truth and discipline [of the gospel] are contained in the written
books, and the unwritten traditions which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ
himself, or from the Apostles themselves, the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down even unto us,
transmitted as it were from hand to hand; [the Synod] following the examples of the orthodox
Fathers, receives and venerates with an equal affection of piety and reverence, all the books of
the Old and New Testament--seeing that one God is the author of both--as also the said traditions,
as well those appertaining to faith as to morals, as having been dictated, either by Christ’s own
word of mouth, or by the Holy Ghost, and preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous
succession.” Council of Trent, Session IV (April 8, 1546) Decree Concerning the Canonical
Scriptures, translated by, Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom (4th ed., revised, New York:
Harper, 1919), volume 2, pp. 79, 80.

The Profession of Faith of the Council of Trent states:

“The apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions and all other observances and constitutions of that
same Church I most firmly admit and embrace. I likewise accept Holy Scripture according to that
sense which our holy Mother Church has held and does hold, whose [office] is to judge of the
true meaning and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures; I shall never accept nor interpret it
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 237 of 369
otherwise than in accordance with the unanimous consent of the Fathers.” Quoted in, Jaroslav
Pelikan, The Riddle or Roman Catholicism (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1959), p. 82

Dei Verbum (“The Word of God”)

Now let’s examine the declaration on the Word of God that was drafted at Vatican Council II
and promulgated by Pope Paul VI on November 18, 1965. This is not the personal opinion of
the pope but rather the declaration of an ecumenical council which gives it apostolic authority.
Please notice how the key expressions mirror the Jewish view of tradition in the days of Christ:

“But in order to keep the gospel forever whole and alive within the Church, the apostles left
bishops as their successors; handing over their own teaching office to them and so the apostolic
preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved by a
continuous succession of preachers until the end of time. Therefore, the apostles handing on what
they themselves had received, warn the faithful to hold fast to the traditions which they have
learned either by word of mouth or by letter (cf. 2 Th. 2:15), and to fight in defense of the faith
handed on once and for all (cf. Jude 3). Now what was handed on by the apostles includes
everything which contributes to the holiness of life, and the increase in faith of the People of God;
and so the Church, in her teaching, life, and worship, perpetuates and hands on to all generations
all that she herself is, all that she believes.

“This tradition which comes from the apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy
Spirit. For there is a growth in understanding of the realities and the words which have been
handed down. This happens through the contemplation and study made by believers, who treasure
these things in their hearts (cf. Lk. 2:19, 51), through the intimate understanding of spiritual things
they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received through episcopal
succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries succeed one another, the Church constantly
moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth until the words of God reach their complete
fulfillment in her. . . .

“Hence there exist a close connection and communication between sacred tradition and sacred
Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring; in a certain way merge
into a unity and tend toward the same end. For sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as
it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the
apostles, sacred tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was entrusted to the
apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. Thus, led by the light of the Spirit of truth, these
successors can in their preaching preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it
more widely known. Consequently, it is not from sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws
her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore both sacred tradition and
sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of devotion and reverence.

“Sacred tradition and sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the word of God, which is
committed to the Church. Holding fast to this deposit, the entire holy people united with their
shepherds remain always steadfast in the teaching of the apostles, in the common life, in the
breaking of the bread, and in prayers (cf. Acts 2:42, Greek text), so that in holding to, practicing,
and professing the heritage of the faith, there results on the part of the bishops and faithful a
remarkable common effort.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 238 of 369
“This task of authentically interpreting the word of God whether written or handed on, has been
entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in
the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching
only what has been handed down, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously, and
explaining it faithfully by divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit; it draws from
this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

“It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, sacred Scripture, and the teaching authority of the
Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot
stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one
Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.” (Walter M. Abbott., general editor,
The Documents of Vatican II, ‘Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation,’ (The America
Press, 1966), pp. 115-118

Roman Catholic Catechism

We will now turn to article #2 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church which deals with ‘the
transmission of divine revelation’:

“76 In keeping with the Lord’s command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:

--orally ‘by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example
they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves received--whether from the
lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting
of the Holy Spirit,’

--in writing ‘by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the
inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing’.

. . . continued in apostolic succession

77 In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles
left bishops as their successors. They gave them ‘their own position of teaching authority.’ Indeed,
‘the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be
preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.’

78 This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition since it is distinct
from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, ‘the Church, in her
doctrine, life, and worship perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is,
all that she believes.’ ‘The sayings of the holy Fathers are a witness to the life-giving presence of
this Tradition, showing how its riches are poured out in the practice and life of the Church, in her
belief and her prayer.’

One common source. . . .

80 ‘Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, then, are bound closely together and communicate
one with the other. For both of them flowing out from the same divine well-spring, come together
in some fashion to form one thing and move towards the same goal.’ Each of them makes present
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 239 of 369
and fruitful in the Church the mystery of Christ, who promised to remain with his own ‘always, to
the close of the age.’

. . . . two distinct modes of transmission

81 ‘Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy
Spirit.’

‘And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its entirety the Word of God which has been entrusted to the
apostles of Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so
that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound, and spread it
abroad by their preaching.’

82 As a result the Church, to whom the transmission and interpretation of Revelation is entrusted,
‘does not derive her certainty about all revealed truths from the holy Scriptures alone. Both
Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and
reverence.’

Apostolic Tradition and ecclesial traditions

83 The Tradition here in question comes from the apostles and hands on what they received from
Jesus teaching and example what they learned from the Holy Spirit. The first generation of
Christians did not yet have a written New Testament, and the New Testament itself demonstrates
the process of living Tradition.

The heritage of faith entrusted to the whole of the Church

84 The apostles entrusted the ‘Sacred deposit’ of the faith (the depositum fidei), contained in
Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the whole of the Church. ‘By adhering to [this heritage] the
entire holy people, united to its pastors, remains always faithful to the teaching of the apostles, to
the brotherhood, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. So, in maintaining, practicing, and
professing the faith that has been handed on there should be a remarkable harmony between the
bishops and the faithful.’

The Magisterium of the Church

85 ‘The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form
or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, teaching office of the Church alone.
Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.’ This means that the task of
interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the
Bishop of Rome.’

86 ‘Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only
what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it
listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication, and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes
for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.’

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 240 of 369
Significant Words of Pius XII
Concerning this Magisterium, Pope Pius XII once stated:
“Together with these sacred sources of Scripture and tradition, God has given a living
magisterium to His Church, to illumine and clarify what is contained in the deposits of faith
obscurely and implicitly.” Quoted in, Jaroslav Pelikan, The Riddle of Roman Catholicism
(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1959), p. 83.

Additional Quotations

“Like two sacred rivers flowing from Paradise, the Bible and divine Tradition contain the Word
of God, the precious gems of revealed truths.
“Though these two divine streams are in themselves, on account of their divine origin, of equal
sacredness, and are both full of revealed truths, still, of the two, Tradition is to us more clear and
safe.” Joseph Faa di Bruno, Catholic Belief, revised by Louis A. Lambert (New York: Benziger
Brothers, 1884), p. 45

“Some of the truths which God has revealed and which have always been taught by the Catholic
Church are not contained in the Bible. These truths have come down to us by what is called oral
tradition; that is, they have been handed down by word of mouth. By Catholic Tradition, therefore,
we understand all those truths which the Church received from Jesus Christ and the Apostles, but
which are not found in the Bible. These truths we firmly believe, because they were revealed by
God and are proposed to us by the Church.

“Some of the truths that have been handed down to us by Tradition and are not recorded in the
Sacred Scripture, are the following: that there are just seven Sacraments; that there is a
Purgatory; that, in the New Law, Sunday should be kept holy instead of the Sabbath; that infants
should be baptized, and that there are precisely seventy-two books in the Bible.

“The truths of Catholic Tradition have been handed down in the Church by means of the writings
of the ‘Fathers of the Church,’ as well as by the decrees of Councils, by approved Creeds and by
the prayers and ceremonies of the Church. These ancient writings and institutions show plainly
what has been the faith of the Church from the earliest times.

“However, it is only the infallible teaching office of the Church that secures us against error as
to the truth contained in Tradition as well as in the Holy Scripture. The voice of the Church is the
voice of God.” Francis J. Butler, Holy Family Series of Catholic Catechisms (Boston: Thomas J.
Flynn & Co., 1904), p. 63.

“From all of which it must be abundantly clear that the Bible alone is not a safe and competent
guide because it is not now and has never been accessible to all, because it is not clear and
intelligible to all, and because it does not contain all the truths of the Christian religion.

“The simple fact is that the Bible, like all dead letters, calls for a living interpreter [yes, the Holy
Spirit does this, not the Magisterium]. . . . Just as the Supreme Court is the authorized living

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 241 of 369
interpreter of the constitution, so the Catholic Church is the living authoritative interpreter of the
Bible. She has been the preserver and custodian of the Bible through the centuries, and she
interprets it for us in the name and with the authority of Jesus Christ.” (John O’Brien, The Faith
of Millions (Huntington, Indiana: Our Sunday Visitor, Inc., 1974), pp. 137, 138)

“By TRADITION we do not mean a mere report, a hearsay, wanting sufficient evidence to deserve
belief; or a local tradition started by men, and therefore merely human, as were those traditions
of the Pharisees condemned by our Lord; but we mean a Tradition first coming from God,
continually taught, recorded, and in all desirable ways kept alive by a body of trustworthy men
successively chosen in a divine, or divinely appointed manner, well instructed, and who are, as a
body, protected by God from teaching what is wrong, or handing down unfaithfully to others the
doctrine committed to them.” Joseph Faa di Bruno, Catholic Belief, revised by Louis A. Lambert
(New York: Benzinger Brothers, 1884), pp. 39, 40

“Since the truths contained in Scripture and those handed down by Tradition both come from God,
Scripture and Tradition are of equal value as sources of faith. Both deserve the same reverence
and respect. Each alone is sufficient to establish a truth of our holy faith. . . .

“Scripture and Tradition are called the remote rule of faith, because the Catholic does not base
his faith directly on these sources. The proximate rule of faith is for him [the Catholic] the One,
Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, which alone has received from God the authority to
interpret infallibly the doctrines He has revealed, whether these be contained in Scripture or in
Tradition.” John Laux, A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies, part 1
(New York: Benziger Brothers, 1936), pp. 50, 51

“Because the origin of our faith is not the Bible alone, but the Church which gives us both the
written and the unwritten word. . .

“So in the New Law, Catholics believe some things not in the Scriptures, although wholly in
accord with them, because of the infallible witness of the Church as to their divine or apostolic
origin. Why do Protestants accept the Scriptures as inspired? Why do they honor the first day of
the week instead of the seventh? Why do they baptize children? Contrary to their principles, they
must look outside the Bible to the voice of tradition, which is not human, but divine, because
guaranteed by the divine, infallible witness of the Catholic Church.” Bertrand L. Conway, The
Question Box Answers (New York: The Columbus Press, 1910), pp. 75, 76.

Thus the Roman Catholic Church claims that the Bible is subservient to her rather that she to the
Bible. Regarding this, Keith Fournier states:

“I believe the Bible is the Book of the church, not that the church is the church of the book.” (Keith
Fournier, Evangelical Catholics, p. 17)

Regarding this supremacy of the church over the Bible, John A. O’Brien—for many years a
professor of theology at the University of Notre Dame, has stated:

“She [the Church] is not the child of the Bible, as many non-Catholics imagine, but its mother.
She derives neither her existence nor her teaching authority from the New Testament. She had
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 242 of 369
both before the New Testament was born: she secured her being, her teachings, her authority
directly from Jesus Christ.

“If all the books of the Bible and all the copies thereof were blotted out, she would still be in
possession of all the truths of Christ and could still continue to preach them as she did before a
single word of the New Testament was written; for those truths are deep in her mind, heart and
memory, in her liturgical and sacramental life, in the traditions, written and unwritten, which go
directly back to Christ.” (John A. O’Brien, The Faith of Millions (Huntington, Indiana: Our
Sunday Visitor, Inc., 1974), p. 129.

Important Conclusions
From the foregoing quotations and from the empirical observation of contemporary Roman
Catholicism, we can reach the following conclusions:

Roman Catholicism has a virtually identical view of divine revelation as did apostate Judaism
in the days of Christ. The three elements of a [1] sacred deposit written and oral, a [2]
transmitting mechanism and an [3] authoritative living interpreter are all present in both
systems. Strikingly, the terminology is virtually identical as well:

‘Tradition’
‘handed down’
‘passed on’
‘received’
‘hold’
‘unbroken succession’

In both systems the oral traditions supposedly go back to an original source. In the case of the
Jews, that source was God through Moses; in the case of the Roman Catholic Church it was
Christ through Peter.

Amazingly when the Pope speaks ex-cathedra his word is considered infallible and final. When
the rabbis spoke from Moses’ cathedra their word was considered infallible and final as well.

In both systems the oral tradition and the written word were in theory given equal authority but
in actual practice oral tradition transcended the authority of the written word and frequently
contradicted it.

In Judaism, the people were expected to render implicit and unquestioning submission to the
theological views of the scholars. It was believed that the common man could not correctly
interpret the Scriptures so he must depend upon the interpretation of the ‘experts’. Any divergence
was swiftly punished with expulsion from the synagogue.

In Roman Catholicism the same is true. Any disagreement with the theological cadre is punished
with threats of excommunication. In fact, even theologians who disagree with the magisterium
are defrocked from their teaching positions, as can be seen, for example, in the case of Hans Kung.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 243 of 369
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 244 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #18 – THE ROMAN CATHOLIC

VIEW OF TRADITION - Part 2
Review from previous lectures

From three main sources, the Roman Catholic Catechism, Dei Verbum and numerous scholars
we have noticed that Roman Catholicism has a virtually identical view of divine revelation as
did apostate Judaism in the days of Christ. The three elements of a [1] sacred deposit written
and oral, a [2] transmitting mechanism and an authoritative [3] living interpreter are all present
in both systems.

Strikingly, the terminology is virtually identical as well:

‘Tradition’
‘handed down’
‘passed on’
‘received’
‘hold’
‘unbroken succession’

In both systems the oral traditions supposedly go back to an original source. In the case of the
Jews, that source was God through Moses; in the case of the Roman Catholic Church it was
Christ through Peter.

When the rabbis spoke from Moses’ kathedra their word was considered infallible and final.
When the Pope speaks ex-cathedra his word is considered infallible and final.

In both systems the oral tradition and the written word were in theory given equal authority but
in actual practice oral tradition transcended the authority of the written word and contradicted it.

In Judaism, the people were expected to render implicit and unquestioning submission to the
theological views of the scholars. Any divergence was swiftly punished with expulsion from the
synagogue.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 245 of 369
In Roman Catholicism the same is true. Any disagreement with the theological cadre is punished
with threats of excommunication.

How to Control the Masses

In the times of Christ, the people were captivated by the teachings of Jesus. In fact, multitudes
followed Him. But through the influence and pressure of the religious leaders, the multitude
eventually clamored for the blood of Jesus (Matthew 27:20)

Trust in the Preachers

To blindly trust in the opinions of religious leaders is dangerous. If Satan can control the religious
leaders, he can control the masses. In fact, by controlling the teachings of the Magisterium, Satan
can control the masses.

Notice this amazing statement by Ellen G. White:

“Satan is constantly endeavoring to attract attention to man in the place of God. He leads the
people to look to bishops, to pastors, to professors of theology, as their guides, instead of
searching the Scriptures to learn their duty for themselves. Then, by controlling the minds of
these leaders, he can influence the multitudes according to his will.” Ellen G. White, The Great
Controversy, p. 595

Interestingly, Ellen White then compares the plight of the populace in Christ’s day with the
condition of the people who belong to the Roman Catholic system today. Regarding the control
the Jewish leaders exerted over the populace in Christ’s day, she states:

“When Christ came to speak the words of life, the common people heard Him gladly; and many,
even of the priests and rulers, believed on Him. But the chief of the priesthood [the equivalent of
the pope] and the leading men [the equivalent of the Magisterium] of the nation were determined
to condemn and repudiate His teachings. . . . These opponents of Jesus were men whom the people
had been taught from infancy to reverence, to whose authority they had been accustomed
implicitly to bow. ‘How is it,’ they asked, ‘that our rulers and learned scribes do not believe on
Jesus? Would not these pious men receive Him if He were the Christ?’ It was the influence of
such teachers that led the Jewish nation to reject their Redeemer.”

Protestant Leaders
And regarding the control of the Roman Catholic and Protestant clergy over their masses, Ellen
White says:

“Christ foresaw that the undue assumption of authority indulged by the scribes and Pharisees
would not cease with the dispersion of the Jews. . . . The Roman Church reserves to the clergy the
right to interpret the Scriptures. On the ground that ecclesiastics alone are competent to explain
God’s word, it is withheld from the common people. Though the Reformation gave the Scriptures
to all, yet the selfsame principle which was maintained by Rome prevents multitudes in Protestant
churches from searching the Bible for themselves. They are taught to accept its teaching as
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 246 of 369
interpreted by the church; and there are thousands who dare receive nothing, however plainly
revealed in Scripture, that is contrary to their creed or the established doctrine of their church...

“There are today thousands of professors of religion who can give no other reason for points of
faith which they hold than that they were so instructed by their religious leaders. They pass by the
Savior’s teachings almost unnoticed, and place implicit confidence in the words of the ministers.
But are ministers infallible? How can we trust our souls to their guidance unless we know from
God’s word that they are light bearers? A lack of moral courage to step aside from the beaten
track of the world leads many to follow in the steps of learned men; and by their reluctance to
investigate for themselves, they are becoming hopelessly fastened in the chains of error. They
see that the truth for this time is plainly brought to view in the Bible; and they feel the power of
the Holy Spirit attending its proclamation; yet they allow the opposition of the clergy to turn them
from the light. Though reason and conscience are convinced, these deluded souls dare not think
differently from the minister; and their individual judgment, their eternal interests, are sacrificed
to the unbelief, the pride and prejudice, of another.” (Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy,
pp. 595-597)

Lipstick
Like in Judaism, Roman Catholicism is caught up in a system of oppressive casuistry. In fact,
Canon Law would be equivalent to the Jewish Talmud where the rules and regulations are
codified. Notice the following two examples from canon law (there are 1752 canon laws):

“Question 1: Is there any reason to fear that lip-stick will break the eucharistic fast?”

“Question 2: If the lips of a woman who is receiving Extreme Unction are coated with lip-stick, is
there any danger that the anointing of the mouth will not be valid?”

“Answer 1: . . . . It is not conformable with theological teaching to warn women against the use
of lip-stick before receiving Holy Communion on the ground that they are likely to break their
fast.”

“Answer 2: If there is a thick coating of lip-stick on the lips, there would be grave danger that the
anointing of the mouth performed on the lips would not be valid; and in that event the validity of
the sacrament would be doubtful. . . .” (Quoted in, Jaroslav Pelikan, The Riddle of Roman
Catholicism (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1959), p. 87)

Commenting on this prescription of canon law, Pelikan remarks on the same page:

“The penitent can never be certain of whether he has been obedient to every detailed prescription
of the law, and yet he must be certain in order to find salvation and peace.”

This is the same problem which existed in the days of Christ. The Jews had developed so many
prescriptions and proscriptions that not even the most pious believer could obey them all. Thus
the Jewish laws contained in the Talmud are paralleled by the laws contained in Roman Catholic
canon law. And there are thousands of casuistic regulations in Roman Catholic canon law!!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 247 of 369
The 1983 Code of Canon Law contains 7 books with 1752 canons, or laws, most of which are
subdivided into multiple paragraphs
Canon Law and Marriage
Now let’s take a look at the second example from the sphere of marriage:

“Divorce is forbidden. But this general principle is subject to all sorts of qualifications:
separation ‘from bed and board’ is permitted under certain circumstances and may become
permanent; a marriage may be declared null and void if upon investigation it is determined that it
was not valid; a convert may, after baptism, avail himself of the ‘Pauline privilege’ of separation
from his unbaptized spouse and may obtain permission to remarry.” (Jaroslav Pelikan, The Riddle
of Roman Catholicism, (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1959), p. 89.

Does this sound like the problem of Mark 7? A mockery is made of marriage when
qualifications and exceptions (traditions of men) are added to the commandment of God.

Many times the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church contradict the clear Word of God. For
example, one of the declarations of the Council of Trent stated:

“If anyone saith that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity or of celibacy,
and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity or in celibacy than to be united in
matrimony; let him be anathema.” (Council of Trent, Session XXIV (November 11, 1563),
Canons of the Sacrament of Matrimony, canon 10, in Dogmatic Canons and Decrees (New York:
Devin Adair Company, 1912), p. 164.

In the background of this view is the fact that the Roman Catholic Church, beginning primarily
with St. Augustine, teaches that original sin was sexual sin. This is the real reason for the
celibacy of priests and nuns.

The fact is that this statement from the Council of Trent is a blatant contradiction of Genesis
1:28 where God blessed marriage and commanded man to be fruitful and multiply. Jesus
sanctioned marriage by performing His first miracle at a wedding in Cana of Galilee. It is also
in flat contradiction to the fact that all the bishops, elders, deacons and pastors of the early
church were married, even the apostle Peter who supposedly was the first Pope!!! This is a clear
example of making of none effect the Word of God by tradition.

Reading Scripture
The same could be said about Bible study. Even though the Roman Catholic Church in this age
of enlightenment allows, and in some cases even encourages, reading the Bible, it was not always
so.

In Canon 14 of the Council of Toulouse (France) which was celebrated in the year 1229 A. D.
we find the following prohibition:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 248 of 369
“We forbid the laity to have in their possession any copy of the books of the Old and New
Testament, except the Psalter, and such portions of them as are contained in the Breviary, or the
Hours of the Blessed Virgin; and we most strictly forbid even these works in the vulgar tongue.”

Around this same time, William Tyndale was burned at the stake for translating the New Testament
into English contrary to the will of the church. Roman Catholic theologian John Gilmary Shea
admits that the Catholic Church forbade the reading of the Scriptures in the common tongue:

"In early times, the Bible was read freely by the lay people, and the Fathers constantly encourage
them to do so, although they also insist on the obscurity of the sacred text. No prohibitions were
issued against the popular reading of the Bible. New dangers came during the middle ages. When
the heresy of the Albigenses arose there was a danger from corrupt translations, and also from
the fact that the heretics tried to make the faithful judge the Church by their own interpretation of
the Bible. To meet these evils, the Council of Toulouse (1229) and Tarragona (1234) forbade the
laity to read the vernacular translations of the Bible. Pius IV required the bishops to refuse lay
persons leave to read even Catholic versions of the Scripture, unless their confessors or parish
priests judged that such readings was likely to prove beneficial." Shea John Gilmary Ed, The
Catholic Educator: A Library of Catholic Devotion and Instruction, New York, Peter J. Ryan, p
61)

The Council of Trent reaffirmed the same position. Rules on Prohibited Books was approved
by Pope Pius IV, in 1564:

"Since it is clear from experience that if the Sacred Books are permitted everywhere and without
discrimination in the vernacular, there will by reason of the boldness of men arise therefrom more
harm than good, the matter is in this respect left to the judgment of the bishop or inquisitor, who
may with the advice of the pastor or confessor permit the reading of the Sacred Books translated
into the vernacular by Catholic authors to those who they know will derive from such reading no
harm but rather an increase of faith and piety, which permission they must have in writing. Those,
however, who presume to read or possess them without such permission, may not receive
absolution from their sins till they have handed them over to the ordinary. Book dealers who sell
or in any other way supply Bibles written in the vernacular to anyone who has not this permission,
shall lose the price of the books, which is to be applied by the bishop to pious purposes, and in
keeping with the nature of the crime they shall be subject to other penalties which are left to the
judgment of the same bishop. Regulars who have not the permission of their superiors may not
read or purchase them."

How is it that the Roman Catholic system, in its church councils can condemn the reading of
the Bible by the common lay person when Jesus said, ‘search the Scriptures’ and Paul said that
they are able to make one ‘wise unto salvation?’ Once again, tradition has made of none effect
the Word of God!

Mariology
St. Alphonsus di Liguori
St. Alphonsus di Liguori lived in the 17th century.
22 volumes of his work have been published.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 249 of 369
He was canonized as a saint by Pope Gregory XIV in 1839 and was declared a doctor of the
church by Pope Pius IX. He is one of only 32 doctors of the church whose writings are especially
trustworthy and of authority.
Liguori wrote The Glories of Mary, a book which is greatly venerated by Roman Catholics.
Lest you think that this volume contains only one man’s opinion about Mary, I would mention
that the book is actually a collection of the patristic wisdom of the Roman Catholic Church from
the Early Church Fathers till his day. Thus the book does not reflect Liguori’s view of Mary but
rather what has been taught by Roman Catholic theologians, doctors and saints throughout the
course of the centuries.
Liguori himself expresses the reason for preparing his book:

“I endeavored to collect, from as many authors as I could lay my hands on, the choicest passages,
extracted from Fathers and theologians, and those which seemed to me to be the most to the point,
and have put them together in this book, in order that the devout may with little trouble and expense
be able to inflame themselves with the love of Mary, and more particularly to furnish the priests
with matter for their sermons, wherewith to excite others to devotion towards this divine Mother.”
The Glories of Mary, p. 30.

The work consists of several chapters. In each, Liguori seeks to prove a certain point about
Mary. At the end of each chapter, he gives an illustration of the point and ends with a prayer to
Mary based on the content of the chapter.
The edition I am using was published by the Redemptorist Fathers in 1931 and bears the
imprimatur by Patrick (Cardinal) Hayes on April 16, 1931.
The preponderance of Liguori’s quotations come from the church fathers, the apocryphal books
of Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom of Solomon and the Old Testament books of Proverbs and Song
of Solomon. Most of these quotations in their original context apply to wisdom personified
(Jesus) or to Solomon’s bride (the church) and yet Liguori applies them to Mary simply because
the Church has said so.
Liguori persistently tears texts out of their contexts. Texts are extracted from the Old Testament
and applied to Mary when there is not any New Testament warrant to do so. Many times, verses
that originally applied to Jesus, Liguori applies to Mary.

Notice the following misuse of texts:

“If Mary is for us, who can be against us?” (Romans 8:31) Glories of Mary, p. 101
“Mary was prefigured by the dove which returned to Noah in the Ark with an olive branch in its
beak, as a pledge of the peace which God granted to men.” Glories of Mary, p. 202
“Glorious things are said of you, O city of God” Glories of Mary, p. 244
“Correctly, then, can we here say with St. Paul, Having this seal, the Lord knoweth who are His;
that is to say, whoever carries with him the mark of devotion to Mary is recognized by God as
his.” Glories of Mary, pp. 244, 245
The high regard which the Roman Catholic Church has for Liguori can be seen by the fact that
sometime after his death, his grave in Nocera was opened and his Three writing fingers were cut
off and sent to Rome by wish of Pope Pius VII who said:
“Let those three fingers that have written so well for the honor of God, of the Blessed Virgin
and of religion, be carefully preserved and sent to Rome.” Cited in, The Glories of Mary, p. 20

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 250 of 369
Fundamental Flaw
“But God was pleased that Mary should in all things resemble Jesus; and as her Son died, it was
becoming that the mother should also die.” Glories of Mary, p. 407.
This is the fundamental leap of logic that the Roman Catholic Church employs to exalt Mary. They
use expressions such as “it was fitting,” “it was necessary,” “it was befitting” for Mary to be equal
with Jesus. Where to we find that in all things Mary was to resemble Jesus? In Roman Catholic
theology Mary actually becomes a rival of Jesus and overshadows him.

A Perpetual Virgin?
According to the Roman Catholic Church, Mary was perpetually a virgin. In other words, Mary
never had sexual relations with Joseph either before or after Jesus was born. How does this square
with the written Scriptures?
The affirmation in Luke 2:7: that Jesus was the first-born of Mary strongly suggests that she had
other children after Jesus: “And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in
swaddling cloths and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.”
The statement in Matthew 1:18 that Mary was with child before she and Joseph came together
strongly hints at the idea that they came together after marriage: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ
was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she
was found with child of the Holy Spirit.”
Matthew 1:24-25 explicitly states: “Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of
the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, 25 and did not know her till she had brought
forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name JESUS.”
Psalm 69:8 seems to indicate that Jesus was only one of Mary’s children. Several verses in this
Psalm clearly indicate that the Messiah was in view: “Zeal for your house has eaten me up” (verse
9) “gall for food and vinegar to drink” (verse 21) “I have become a stranger to my brothers, and
an alien to my mother's children.”Mary was conceived without original sin.

What the Fathers said about Mary

In his book Liguori gathers a mass of information that has been handed down by previous
generations about Mary. I summarize the Roman Catholic ‘wisdom’ that has been handed down
from generation to generation according to Liguori:

Mary was the mother of God

Mary was taken bodily to heaven

Roman Catholic theologian, Karl Keating, states: “Still, Fundamentalists ask, where is the proof
from Scripture? Strictly, there is none. It was the Catholic Church that was commissioned by
Christ to teach all nations and to teach them infallibly. The mere fact that the Church teaches
the doctrine of the Assumption as something definitely true is a guarantee that it is true.” Karl
Keating, Catholicism and Fundamentalism: The Attack on ‘Romanism’ by ‘Bible Christians’,
p. 275.

The world was created by God and Mary

She was born immaculate and holy
She never sinned
She is the incarnation of the Holy Spirit

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 251 of 369
 She is full of grace and can dispense it to human beings at will
She is a priest
She is our advocate or mediatrix

Regarding this, the conciliar declaration Lumen Gentium states: “Taken up to heaven she did not
lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of
eternal salvation. . . Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of
Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.” Lumen Gentium, section 62

Mary loved the world that she gave her only-begotten Son
Mary is our ladder
We are to pray to Mary to ask for favors
We can only know God through Mary
Mary helps us when we are tempted
Mary is the way to the Father
She is the door
She is the rod out of the root of Jesse
She is co-redemptrix

“If the drive [to declare Mary co-redemptrix] succeeds, Catholics would be obliged as a matter
of faith to accept three extraordinary doctrines: that Mary participates in the redemption achieved
by her son, that all graces that flow from the suffering and death of Jesus Christ are granted only
through Mary’s intercession with her son, and that all prayers and petitions from the faithful on
earth must likewise flow through Mary, who then brings them to the attention of Jesus.” Kenneth
L. Woodward, Newsweek, “Hail Mary”, August 25, 1997, p. 49

“In place of the Holy Trinity, it would appear, there would be a kind of Holy Quartet, with Mary
playing the multiple roles of daughter of the Father, mother of the Son and spouse of the Holy
Spirit.” Kenneth L. Woodward, Newsweek, “Hail Mary”, August 25, 1997, p. 49.

Regarding the position of Mary, Roman Catholic theologian Mark Miravalle has stated: “The
union between the Immaculata and the Holy Spirit is so inexpressible, yet so perfect, that the Holy
Spirit acts only by the Most Blessed Virgin, his Spouse. This is why she is the mediatrix of all
graces given by the Holy Spirit.” Mark Miravalle, p. 54.

She is our refuge

She is our throne of grace
She is the light of the sun
She is our life
She changes and transforms our lives
She protects us from the power of Satan
She is our propitiation
She has a name that is above all names
If we die we have assurance of life in her
All power is given to her in heaven and on earth
She is all-powerful
She is the morning star
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 252 of 369
 She is the mercy seat
She crushes the serpent’s head
She is the pillar of cloud and fire
We can cast out devils in her name
She is the water of life
She is the peacemaker
She is the tower of refuge
She draws all men to herself
She gives eternal life
She is worthy of being praised
She is our hope
We can be saved by Mary’s merits
She is the rainbow of promise
She died, her body saw no corruption, she resurrected and ascended on the third day
The final issue in the great controversy will be: What is your source of authority for your
beliefs and practices? Is it the church or is it the Bible?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 253 of 369
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 254 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #19 – SABBATH CONTROVERSIES

AND TRADITION

The Rabbis and Oral Tradition

The most revered institution in Judaism is the Seventh-day Sabbath. For the rabbis the Sabbath
was equal in importance to all the other precepts of the Torah combined. One Rabbi stated:
“He who observes the Sabbath, is kept from sin.” Another stated: “If Israel were to keep two
Sabbaths according to the laws thereof, they would be redeemed immediately.” It is said that
Rabbi Levi once affirmed: “If Israel kept the Sabbath properly even for one day, the son of David
would come. Why? Because it is equivalent to all the commandments.”

But, were these rabbis referring to the Sabbath as it is found in the written Scriptures? Robert
Johnston responds:

“One of the distinguishing features of Pharisaism had been its high regard for oral tradition. The
Pharisees claimed to be heirs of Ezra the scribe and his court known as the Great Assembly, the
beginning of the Sanhedrin. Indeed, Ezra and the Great Assembly were regarded as transmitters
of oral laws that could be traced all the way back to Moses.” Robert Johnston, The Sabbath in
Scripture and History, p. 70

Regarding the mass of oral tradition in Judaism, Johnston explains:

“For a long time the oral law was indeed oral; there was an inhibition against writing it down for
fear that it might be treated as Scripture. Instead, it was stored up in the heads of the rabbis and
their disciples. However, as scholars continually added to the body of tradition, it grew so massive
that memories were too severely taxed.” The Sabbath in Scripture and History, p. 70

This is the reason why oral tradition was codified in the Babylonian and Palestinian Talmuds.

Sabbath Prohibitions
The Old Testament has relatively few Sabbath prohibitions. Among those prohibited activities
are [1] Work, [2] kindling a fire, [3] trading and [4] cooking. But the rabbis expanded these simple

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 255 of 369
prohibitions into an entire system of rules and regulations. On the basis of Deuteronomy 25:3
thirty nine major activities were forbidden on the Sabbath but each of these was subdivided into
an almost endless list of specific prohibitions:

“The main classes of work are forty save one: sowing, plowing, reaping, binding sheaves,
threshing, winnowing, cleansing crops, grinding, sifting, kneading, baking, shearing wool,
washing or beating or dying it, spinning, weaving, making two loops, weaving two threads,
separating two threads, tying, loosening, sewing two stitches, tearing in order to sew two stitches,
hunting a gazelle, slaughtering or flaying or salting it or curing its skin, scraping it or cutting it
up, writing two letters, erasing in order to write two letters, building, pulling down, putting out a
fire, lighting a fire, striking with a hammer and taking anything from one domain to another. These
are the main classes of work: forty save one.”

Some of the rules that the rabbis had added to the Sabbath to ‘protect it’ from being broken were:

A fruit on the ground under a tree could not be picked up and eaten on the Sabbath because it
might have fallen on that very day.

An egg could not be removed from a nest on the Sabbath but it could be protected until after the
Sabbath when it could be eaten.

Instrumental music was forbidden on the Sabbath.

If a house caught fire on the Sabbath life could be saved but not any property that was in the
house.

All sacred books could be saved from the fire and enough food and drink for the remaining
Sabbath meals.

It was a cardinal offense to tilt a lamp in order to make more oil run toward the wick because this
would make it burn brighter which was the sin of kindling.

A person could not read by the light of a lamp on the Sabbath.

A person could not touch money or any of the tools of his trade even if he did not intend to work
with them.

Climbing a tree, swimming, clapping the hands, slapping the thighs and stamping the feet were
forbidden.

Burials and weddings could not take place on the Sabbath.

Writing was forbidden on the Sabbath.

A chair could not be dragged across the floor with the intention of making a furrow with it but if
the furrow was unintended it was allowed.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 256 of 369
Persons could not directly carry a stone but they were permitted to lift up a child even if he had a
stone in his hand.

Treatment of non-mortal ailments and handicaps could not be treated on the Sabbath but an eye
salve could be placed on the eye before sundown of Friday or a plaster could be placed on the
wound so that the healing continued on the Sabbath.

If a deer wandered into your house on the Sabbath one man could not trap it but two could do
so.

It was forbidden to tithe on the Sabbath.

No Jew was allowed to travel more than two thousand cubits beyond the city limits where he
lived.

To mitigate the 2000-cubit limit one need only deposit enough food for two meals at 2000 cubits
distance and declare the place his temporary abode and then from there he could travel an
additional 2000 cubits.

Sabbath Controversies

Of all the controversies that Jesus faced, none was greater than those over the Sabbath. He was
in constant conflict with the denominations of his day and was despised by them because He
did not keep their Sabbath.

Most of these controversies dealt with the issue of healing people with chronic illnesses [a man
born blind, a paralytic for 38 years, a woman who could not straighten out for 18 years, a man with
a withered hand, a case of the flu on the Sabbath.

Some evangelical scholars have said that Jesus actually broke the Sabbath by healing people on
it. But, did he break the Bible Sabbath?

Actually, Jesus said it was lawful to do so (for example, Matthew 12:12) while the scribes and
Pharisees said it was unlawful.

The critical question to be answered is this: On what basis did Jesus say it was lawful and on
what basis did the scribes and Pharisees say it was unlawful? In other words, what source of
authority did the scribes and Pharisees use to prove that it was unlawful and which authority did
Jesus use to prove that it was lawful?

Nowhere in the Old Testament Scriptures do we find that it is wrong to alleviate suffering or to
heal the sick on the Sabbath. In fact, in Isaiah 58 we are told that the Sabbath is the special day
to alleviate the suffering of the oppressed.

Where, then, did the scribes and Pharisees get the idea that it was unlawful to heal on the Sabbath?
Not from the written Scriptures but rather from the deposit of unwritten tradition!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 257 of 369
Plucking Grain on the Sabbath

Let’s take the case of the disciples plucking grain on the Sabbath to satisfy their hunger. Nowhere
are we told that it is wrong for a person to pluck grain to satisfy hunger on the Sabbath [though
it was wrong to harvest your crop for commercial purposes on the Sabbath].

Samuele Bacchiocchi has shown that Jesus broke at least four rabbinical rules when He allowed
His disciples to satisfy their hunger on the Sabbath. These rules were: [1] reaping, [2] threshing,
[3] winnowing and [4] preparing a meal (see, Samuele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath to Sunday
(Rome: Pontifical Gregorian University Press, 1977, p. 49)

In other words, Jesus was not breaking the Sabbath commandment as found in the written
Scriptures. He was breaking the rabbinical sabbath that had been created by oral tradition.

The question is: How did Jesus answer the rabbis on this issue? The answer is simple. On several
occasions Jesus referred to written Scripture to justify his behavior on the Sabbath:

Mark 2:25-27 [I Samuel 21:6; Genesis 2:1-3]

Luke 13:15 [Deuteronomy 5:14]
John 7:22-23 [Leviticus 12:3]

Jesus made it clear that by not helping the needy, the Pharisees were actually breaking the
Sabbath while He was keeping it. In other words, their Tradition had made of none effect the
written Word of God. Their rules which had the intention of protecting the Sabbath from being
broken actually led them to break it!

So in a very real sense, the Sabbath of the Pharisees was:

A counterfeit sabbath
A man made sabbath
A Sabbath based on tradition
A sabbath of their creation

The Sabbath Issue in the End Time

As Seventh-day Adventists we believe that the great issue in the final controversy will involve
the commandments of God versus the commandments of men and true worship to God versus
false worship to the beast!

Will the final conflict involve a false Sabbath and a true Sabbath? Yes. The only difference
between the times of Jesus and ours is that in those days the ones who claimed to be the people of
God kept the Sabbath in the wrong way while in the end-time the Christian world will keep the
wrong day. But the principle is the same. In both cases it is a Sabbath of created by man based
on tradition and not the Sabbath which God made at creation.

The conflict in Christ’s day was actually over the Sabbath made by God versus the Sabbath
made by human tradition, and to keep a Sabbath made by man is to practice false worship!!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 258 of 369
Intention to Kill
It must be underlined that the Pharisees not only broke God’s Sabbath by abstaining from doing
good on the Sabbath but they also broke the Sabbath by intending to kill Jesus on it (Mark 3:6;
Matthew 12:14; John 5:14).

Irony of ironies, they condemned Jesus for healing on the Sabbath but they wanted to kill on it
because he did not keep it as they thought He should!! Certainly their rules of Sabbath observance
had made of none effect the commandment which says: ‘You shall not kill.’

Does this also ring a bell? Is there as time coming when the Christian world will want to kill
those who do not keep their Sabbath, that is, a Sabbath of human invention? Revelation 13:15
says that this is just what will happen.

Is Sabbath Keeping Legalism?

It has always been an enigma to me how the Christian world can accuse Seventh-day Adventists
of being legalists for keeping the Sabbath and then turn right around some day and say, ‘You
either keep the Sunday or we will kill you!’ What worse legalism could exist than to keep the
Sunday for fear of death rather than out of love for God?

We also know that the Christian world will teach that the increasing natural disasters in the
world are due to God’s wrath because of the desecration of Sunday as the day of worship. They
will say: ‘Let us return to God, keep Sunday, and then God will bless America once again.’ This
is legalism—attempting to earn God’s favor or turning away His disfavor by keeping Sunday!

Roman Catholics and the Sabbath

A challenge to Protestants by John Eck, the enemy of Luther:

“The Scripture teaches ‘Remember that you sanctify the day of the Sabbath; six days shall you
labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God’, etc. But the
Church has changed the Sabbath into the Lord’s [day] by its own authority, concerning which
you have no scripture. . . The Sabbath is commanded many times by God; neither in the Gospels
nor in Paul is it declared that the Sabbath has ceased; nevertheless the Church has instituted the
Lord’s Day through the tradition of the apostles without Scripture.” (Johann Eck, Enchiridion
Locorum Communium . . . Adversus Lutheranos [Handbook of Common Places against the
Lutherans]. Venice: Ioan. Antonius & Fratres de Sabio, 1533, fols. 4v, 5r, 42v. Latin. Trans. by
Frank H. Yost. Used by permission of Mrs. Frank Yost. [FRS No. 127]
The following Roman Catholic scholar refers to all of the texts we commonly use to defend the
Sabbath but he then says that we are supposed to keep Sunday. Why?

“The first precept in the Bible is that of sanctifying the seventh day: ‘God blessed the seventh day,
and sanctified it’ (Genesis 2:3). This precept was confirmed by God in the Ten Commandments:
‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God’
(Exodus 20). On the other hand, Christ declares that He is not come to destroy the law, but to
fulfill it (Matthew 5:17). He Himself observed the Sabbath: ‘and, as His custom was, He went into

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 259 of 369
the synagogue on the Sabbath day’ (Luke 4:16). His disciples likewise observed it after His death:
‘They rested on the Sabbath day according to the commandment’ (Luke 23:56). Yet with all this
weight of Scripture authority for keeping the Sabbath, or seventh day, holy, Protestants of all
denominations make this a profane day, and transfer the obligation of it to the first day of the
week, or the Sunday. Now what authority have they for doing this? None, whatever, except the
unwritten word, or tradition of the Catholic Church which declares that the apostles made the
change in honor of Christ’s resurrection, and the descent of the Holy Ghost on that day of the
week.” John Milner, End of Religious Controversy, (New York: P. J. Kenedy, 1897), p. 89

Notice this indictment of Protestants by another Roman Catholic Scholar:

“Protestants often deride the authority of Church tradition, and claim to be directed by the Bible
only; yet they, too, have been guided by the customs of the ancient Church, which find no warrant
in the Bible, but rest on Church tradition only! A striking instance of this is the following: The
first positive command in the Decalogue is to ‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy’, and
this precept was enforced by the Jews for thousands of years. But the Sabbath day, the observance
of which God commanded, was our Saturday. Yet who among either Catholics or Protestants,
except a sect or two, like the ‘Seventh Day Baptists’, ever keep that commandment now? None.
Why is this? The Bible which Protestants claim to obey exclusively, gives no authorization for the
substitution of the first day of the week for the seventh. On what authority, therefore, have they
done so? Plainly on the authority of that very Catholic Church which they abandoned and whose
traditions they condemn.” John L. Stoddard, Rebuilding a Lost Faith (New York: P. J. Kenedy &
Sons, 1922), p. 80

“Is it not strange that those who make the Bible their only teacher should inconsistently follow in
this matter the tradition of the Church?” Bertrand L. Conway, The Question Box Answers, (New
York: The Columbus Press, 1910), pp. 254, 255

Notice this candid and unapologetic admission:

“So in the New Law, Catholics believe some things not in the Scriptures, although wholly in
accord with them, because of the infallible witness of the Church as to their divine or apostolic
origin. Why do Protestants accept the Scriptures as inspired? Why do they honor the first day of
the week instead of the seventh? Why do they baptize children? Contrary to their principles, they
must look outside the Bible to the voice of tradition, which is not human, but divine, because
guaranteed by the divine, infallible witness of the Catholic Church.” Bertrand Conway, The
Question Box Answers (New York: The Columbus Press, 1910), pp. 75, 76

“Now the Scriptures alone do not contain all the truths which a Christian is bound to believe, nor
do they explicitly enjoin all the duties which he is obliged to practice. Not to mention other
examples, is not every Christian obliged to sanctify Sunday and to abstain on that day from
unnecessary servile work? Is not the observance of this law among the most prominent of our
sacred duties? You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single
line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of
Saturday, a day which we [Catholics] never sanctify.” James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of
Our Fathers (Baltimore: James Murphy Company, 110th edition revised and enlarged) p. 80

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 260 of 369
“Nothing is said in the Bible about the change of the Lord’s day from Saturday to Sunday. We
know of the change only from the tradition of the Church—a fact handed down to us from the
earliest times by the living voice of the Church. That is why we find so illogical the attitude of
many non-Catholics, who say that they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the Bible and
yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord’s day on the say-so of the Catholic Church.” Rev.
Leo J. Trese and John J. Castletot, S. S., Salvation History and the Commandments (1963
edition), p. 294

“The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue
of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday. We say by virtue of her divine
mission, because he who called himself the ‘Lord of the Sabbath,’ endowed her with his own power
to teach, ‘he that heareth you, heareth me;’ commanded all who believe in him to hear her under
penalty of being placed with the ‘heathen and publican;’ and promised to be with her to the end
of the world. She holds her charter as teacher from him—a charter as infallible as perpetual. The
Protestant world at its birth [in the Reformation of the sixteenth century] found the Christian
Sabbath too strongly entrenched to run counter to its existence; it was therefore placed under the
necessity of acquiescing in the arrangement, thus implying the church’s right to change the day,
for over three hundred years. The Christian Sabbath is therefore to this day, the acknowledged
offspring [interesting in the light of Ellen White’s remark that the Sunday is the child of the
papacy—Counsels to the Church, p. 317; GC, p. 54] of the Catholic Church as spouse of the
Holy Ghost, without a word of remonstrance from the Protestant world.” The Catholic Mirror
(Baltimore, September 23, 1893)

“Q. (a) The Bible says ‘The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord,’ and we read in your literature
that it is the only Bible Sabbath there is. Will you please explain how the Sunday observance
originated? (b) Do you think the Seventh Day Adventists keep the right day?

A. If you follow the Bible alone there can be no question that you are obliged to keep Saturday
holy, since that is the day especially prescribed by Almighty God to be kept holy to the Lord. In
keeping Sunday, non-Catholics are simply following the practice of the Catholic Church for 1800
years, a tradition, and not a Bible ordinance. What we would like to know is: Since they deny the
authority of the Church, on what grounds can they base their faith of keeping Sunday. Those who
keep Saturday, like the Seventh Day Adventists, unquestionably have them by the hip in this
practice. And they cannot give them any sufficient answer which would satisfy an unprejudiced
mind. With the Catholics there is no difficulty about the matter. For, since we deny that the Bible
is the sole rule of faith, we can fall back upon the constant practice and tradition of the Church
which, long before the reign of Constantine, even in the very days of the apostles themselves, were
accustomed to keep the first day of the week instead of the last.” F. G. Lentz, The Question Box
(New York: Christian Press Association, 1900), pp. 98, 99

Protestants and the Sabbath

“God made the world in six days and rested on the seventh, sanctifying this day, and setting it
apart from all others as holy to Himself, to be observed by His people throughout their
generations. But the man of sin, exalting himself above God, sitting in the temple of God, and
showing himself to be God, thought to change times and laws. This power, thinking to prove that

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 261 of 369
it was not only equal to God, but above God, changed the rest day, placing the first day of the
week where the seventh should be. And the Protestant world has taken this child of the papacy to
be regarded as sacred. In the Word of God this is called her fornication [Revelation 14:8].” Last
Day Events, p. 123

“The man of sin, who thought to change times and laws, has exalted himself above God by
presenting this spurious sabbath to the world; the Christian world has accepted this child of the
Papacy, and cradled and nourished it, thus defying God by removing His memorial and setting
up a rival sabbath” Selected Messages, vol. 3 p. 406

“The Protestant world have set up an idol sabbath in the place where God's Sabbath should be,
and they are treading in the footsteps of the Papacy.” Letter 90, 1897

The Idol Sabbath

“The Sabbath question is one that will demand great care and wisdom in its presentation. Much
of the grace and power of God will be needed to cast down the idol that has been erected in the
shape of a false sabbath.” Testimonies for the Church, vol. 9, p. 211

“Satan has taken the world captive. He has introduced an idol sabbath, apparently giving to it
great importance. He has stolen the homage of the Christian world away from the Sabbath of the
Lord for this idol sabbath. The world bows to a tradition, a man-made commandment.” Review
and Hearld, March 8, 1898

The Final Issue

The final issue will be one of authority: Is it God and the Bible or the papacy and tradition? Is
homage paid to God by worshiping him on the day that he created or is homage paid to the
papacy by worshiping on the day that it established?

Thus worship to God and keeping his commandments will distinguish one group and worship
to the beast and keeping his commandments will be on the other side.

“Among professed Christians there are idolaters, men and women who are not sealed by God.
Many have subverted the Christian faith into idolatry, giving to a man-made institution the glory
and honor that God requires for His Sabbath day, and compelling others to worship this idol.
Such ones will surely be visited with God's retributive judgments, which are to be poured out
without mixture of mercy upon the unrepentant despisers of God's law.” Manuscript Releases,
Volume 19, p. 244

The Bible, in terms too clear to be misunderstood, repeatedly tells us that the SEVENTH day is
the Sabbath of the Lord! And yet the Roman Catholic Church and Protestants inform us that
Sunday is the Sabbath. On what ground can they do this? Certainly not on Biblical grounds!

But the Roman Catholic Church has become craftier. John Paul II, in his recent pastoral letter,
Dies Domini made a valiant effort to defend Sunday sacredness from a Biblical perspective. He
appeals to philosophical arguments based on human reason. Yet none of his arguments are
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 262 of 369
persuasive to those who take the Bible as their only reliable standard of truth. Nowhere in the
Bible are we told that Sunday is holy, or that we are to keep it in honor of Christ’s resurrection
or that we are required to attend church regularly on that day.

It is a telling fact that John Paul II quotes 212 scholars, church councils, creeds and church
fathers to bolster his weak Biblical case! Once again, tradition has made of none effect the clear
Word of God!

What should we do as Seventh-day Adventists?

“We are to give to the world a manifestation of the pure, noble, holy principles that are to
distinguish the people of God from the world. Instead of the people of God becoming less and less
definitely distinguished from those who do not keep the seventh-day Sabbath, they are to make the
observance of the Sabbath so prominent that the world cannot fail to recognize them as
Seventh-day Adventist.” Manuscript 162, 1903 [found in Evangelism, p. 233].

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 263 of 369
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 264 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #20 – DIES DOMINI

The Horn that Attempted to Change God’s Law

Introduction
Daniel 7:25: This verse describes how the Roman Catholic Papacy would attempt to change God’s
law:

“He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, shall persecute the saints of the Most
High, and shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand for a
time and times and half a time.”

Until his recent death, the most respected and admired man on the planet, hands down, was
Pope John Paul II. On May 31, 1998 (on the Solemnity of Pentecost) he published the Apostolic
Letter Dies Domini which was written primarily for the religious leaders of the Roman Catholic
Church. What did the pope have to say about Sabbath and Sunday?

What I am going to share with you in this study has nothing to do with John Paul II as a person.
I am simply going to compare what he says in his Apostolic Letter with what the Bible says. We
will keep the discussion on a theological level, not a personal one.

#1A: According to the Bible, which day did of the week did God bless
and sanctify and which day is the Lord’s Day?
The Bible says that God blessed the seventh-day Sabbath and made it holy. It also says that Jesus
is the Lord of the seventh-day Sabbath. The book of Genesis also makes it crystal clear that the
Sabbath was established before there was any Jew and before there was any sin. It is part of God’s
original plan for the human race.

Genesis 2:2, 3:

“And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh
day from all His work which He had done. 3 Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it,
because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 265 of 369
Exodus 20:8-11:

"Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10
but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your
son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your
stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the
sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath
day and hallowed it.”

Mark 2:27-28:

“And He said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. 28
Therefore
the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath."

Isaiah 58:13-14:

"If you turn away your foot from the Sabbath, from doing your pleasure on My holy day, and call
the Sabbath a delight, the holy day of the Lord honorable, and shall honor Him, not doing your
own ways, nor finding your own pleasure, nor speaking your own words, Then you shall delight
yourself in the Lord….”

#1B: According to Dies Domini, which day of the week did God bless and
sanctify and which day is the Lord’s Day?
Paragraph #14:

“In the first place, therefore, Sunday is the day of rest because it is the day ‘blessed’ by God and
‘made holy’ by him, set apart from the other days to be, among all of them, ‘the Lord’s Day.”

Samuele Bacchiocchi, who dedicated many years to study the manner in which the Sabbath was
changed to Sunday, explained what would have happened if the apostles had taught the
abandonment of Sabbath observance:

“. . . if Paul or any other apostle had attempted to promote the abandonment of the Sabbath, a
millenarian institution deeply rooted in the religious consciousness of the people, and the adoption
instead of Sunday observance, there would have been considerable opposition on the part of
Jewish-Christians, as was the case with reference to the circumcision. The absence of any echo
of Sabbath/Sunday controversy in the NT is a most telling evidence that the introduction of Sunday
observance is a post-apostolic phenomenon.” Samuele Bacchiocchi, “Pope’s Call for Observance
of Sunday” Issues, Friday, August 7, 1998.

#2A: According to the Bible, which day stands at the heart of all
worship? Which day distinguishes the Creator from His creatures?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 266 of 369
Revelation 14:6-7:

“Then I saw another angel flying in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach
to those who dwell on the earth — to every nation, tribe, tongue, and people—7 saying with a loud
voice: "Fear God and give glory to Him, for the hour of His judgment has come; and worship Him
who made heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water."

The language of Revelation 14:6, 7 comes directly from the fourth commandment of God’s holy
law in Exodus 20:11 where God is identified as the Creator and His sign is the Sabbath.

Exodus 20:11:

“For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and
rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.”

#2B: According to Dies Domini which day stands at the very heart of all
worship?

Paragraph #19:

“The intimate bond between Sunday and the Resurrection of the Lord is strongly emphasized by
all the Churches of East and West. In the tradition of the Eastern Churches in particular, every
Sunday is the anastasimos hemera, the day of Resurrection, and this is why it stands at the heart
of all worship.”

#3A: According to the Bible, what is the distinguishing mark of God’s

people?

Ezekiel 20:12:

“Moreover I also gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between them and Me that they might
know that I am the Lord who sanctifies them.”

Ezekiel 20:20:

“. . . hallow My Sabbaths, and they will be a sign between Me and you that you may know that I
am the Lord your God.'

#3B: According to Dies Domini which is the sign that identifies God’s
true people?

Paragraph #21:

“The book of Revelation gives evidence of the practice of calling the first day of the week ‘the
Lord’s Day’ (1:10). This [Sunday observance] would now be a characteristic distinguishing
Christians from the world around them.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 267 of 369
John Paul II believed that the expression “Lord’s day” in Revelation refers to Sunday even though
this name is never applied to Sunday until the end of the second century in the Apocryphal Gospel
of Peter. The meaning of this expression as it was used at the end of the second century cannot be
read back into a text that was written at the end of the first century. The Bible must tell us which
day is truly the Lord’s Day and every other text in the Bible clearly states that the Seventh day
Sabbath is the Lord’s Day.

According to scholars the Gospel of John and the book of Revelation were written by the same
person at about the same time, that is, at the end of the first century. Neither of these books refers
to Sunday as the [1] Lord’s Day or as a [2] memorial of the resurrection. Neither book attributes
[3] any holiness to Sunday. It is not called a [4] day of rest nor are believers encouraged to go
[5] to church on it. Neither book states that Sunday [6] must be kept in honor of the resurrection
of Jesus.

It is a well-documented fact that for more than one hundred years after the resurrection the church
did not keep the weekly Sunday in honor of the resurrection but rather commemorated it once a
year on the date of the Passover on the 14th day of Nissan no matter which day the Passover fell
on. It was only in the second century that Bishop Victor excommunicated the Christians in Asia
for not commemorating the resurrection on the weekly Sunday.

Paragraph #30:

“Given its many meanings and aspects, and its link to the very foundations of the faith, the
celebration of the Christian Sunday remains, on the threshold of the Third Millennium, an
indispensible element of our Christian identity.”

Paragraph #7:

“Sunday is a day which is at the very heart of the Christian life.”

#4A: According to the Bible, which of the Ten Commandments is the

only one that has the necessary elements of a seal? According to the
Bible, which is the day above all days?
The Bible teaches that God’s seal is related to God’s law (Isaiah 8:16). The only commandment
in God’s law that has the three necessary elements of a seal is the fourth. This commandment
identifies the lawgiver, his title and the territory over which He rules. Notably God placed His seal
also on creation week when on the seventh day he rested and set the Sabbath apart as a reminder
of His creative power.

The Bible sets the Sabbath apart from all other days. It is the day that is over and above every
other day of the week. It is the only day that has a name and a number and it’s the only day that
God calls His. Not only did God set the Sabbath apart from all other days at creation but He
also set it apart by making it the only day on which He did not send manna

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 268 of 369
Exodus 20:11:

“For in six days the [1] Lord [2] made the [3] heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in
them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.”

In an archeological dig in Ugarit, tablets were unearthed that parallel Ten Commandments. The
Ten Commandments have the following characteristics:

They are a covenant: Deuteronomy 4:13

They were written on tables: Deuteronomy 4:13
They were written on both sides of the tablets: Exodus 32:15, 16
The Seal was placed in the middle: Exodus 20:8-11
The seal contains three elements: The name of the lawgiver, His position and His territory

#4B: According to Dies Domini upon which day has God placed His seal?
According to Dies Domini which is the day above all other days?

Paragraph #23:

“Saint Augustine notes in turn: ‘Therefore the Lord too has placed his seal on this day [Sunday],
which is the third day after the Passion.”

Paragraph #25:

“In effect, Sunday is the day above all other days which summons Christians to remember the
salvation which was given to them in baptism and which has made them new in Christ.”

Paragraph #55:

“Blessed be he who has raised the great day of Sunday above all other days.”

#5A: How does God look upon the ancient practice of sun worship?
Ezekiel 8:16, 17:

“So He brought me into the inner court of the Lord's house; and there, at the door of the temple of
the Lord, between the porch and the altar, were about twenty-five men with their backs toward the
temple of the Lord and their faces toward the east, and they were worshiping the sun toward the
east. 17 And He said to me, "Have you seen this, O son of man? Is it a trivial thing to the house of
Judah to commit the abominations which they commit here? For they have filled the land with
violence; then they have returned to provoke Me to anger.”

#5B: According to Dies Domini what relationship exists between the

pagan practice of sun worship and the Christian practice of worship on
the day of the sun?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 269 of 369
Paragraph #27:

“Wise pastoral intuition suggested to the Church the Christianization of the notion of Sunday as
‘the day of the sun’, which was the Roman name for the day and which is retained in some modern
languages. This was in order to draw the faithful away from the seduction of the cults which
worshiped the sun, and to direct the celebration of the day to Christ, humanity’s true ‘sun’.”

Is it the same thing to worship the sun as it is to worship on the day of the sun? In principle it
is the same thing. In fact, it can be historically proven that Sunday came into the Christian Church
from paganism as did many other church observances. In fact, Constantine called it “The
Venerable Day of the Sun.”

The Catholic Catechism quotes St. Justin:

“We all gather on the day of the sun, for it is the first day [after the Jewish Sabbath, but also the
first day] when God, separating matter from darkness, made the world; and on this same day
Jesus Christ our Savior rose from the dead.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph #
2174

The Roman Catholic Church is obsessed with the sun. In almost every single case when the priest
faces the altar he is facing east with his back toward the congregation. Roman Catholic churches,
museums and other buildings are filled with suns and sun bursts. There are suns on chalices, suns
on vestments, suns on altars, suns on glass stained windows (for example in St. Peter’s Basilica)
and suns on works of art. The host is yellow and round and the priests have a round tonsure on
their heads which was an ancient practice of the priests of the sun god.

#6A: According to the Bible should religious observances be guaranteed

by civil legislation?
The first table of the law we should render only to God. According to the first amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, Congress should neither establish the observance of a rest day
nor forbid the free exercise thereof.

Matt 22:21-22: Jesus separated the civil power from the religious power

“And He said to them, "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the
things that are God's."

#6B: According to Dies Domini, should the state guarantee the right of
citizens to observe Sunday as a religious day of rest?

Paragraph #64:

“Only in the fourth century did the civil law of the Roman Empire recognize the weekly recurrence,
determining that on ‘the day of the sun’ the judges, the people of the cities and the various trade
corporations would not work. Christians rejoiced to see thus removed the obstacles which until

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 270 of 369
then had sometimes made observance of the Lord’s Day heroic. They could now devote themselves
to prayer in common without hindrance.”

This civil law was given by Constantine the Great on March 7 in the year 321. Canon 29 of the
Synod of Laodicea held in the year 336, made Sunday observance a religious law. Constantine’s
law read as follows:

“Let all the judges and town people, and the occupation of all trades rest on the venerable day of
the sun.”

The law of the Synod of Laodicea (which was approved in the ecumenical council of Chalcedon
in the year 451) stated:

“Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honoring
the Lord’s Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be
judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.”

Paragraph #66:

“Pope Leo XIII in his Encyclical Rerum Novarum spoke of Sunday rest as a worker’s right which
the State must guarantee.”

Paragraph #67:

“Christians will naturally strive to ensure that civil legislation respects their duty to keep Sunday
holy.”

Benedict XVI’s Apostolic Exhortation, Sacramentum Caritatis, paragraph 74:

“Finally, it is particularly urgent nowadays to remember that the day of the Lord is also a day of
rest from work. It is greatly to be hoped that this fact will also be recognized by civil society, so
that individuals can be permitted to refrain from work without being penalized.”

In recent years the papacy has been putting pressure on the parliament of the European
Community to pass a secular Sunday law. But history proves that secular Sunday laws eventually
morph into religious Sunday laws.

#7A: According to the Bible on which day of the week did Jesus
especially alleviate the suffering and pain of His fellow human beings?

Isaiah 58 clearly describes how the Sabbath should be the special day to alleviate the suffering of
the less fortunate in society. Jesus also chose the Sabbath as the special day to alleviate human
suffering.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 271 of 369
Miracles Jesus performed on Sabbath:

A man with a withered hand (Matthew 12:12)

Cast out demons (Mark 1:21-24)
Peter’s mother-in-law
A woman who could not straighten out for 18 years (Luke 13:10-17)
A man with dropsy [a disease where liquid is retained in the joints causing great pain and
suffering (Luke 14:1-6)
A man paralyzed for 38 years (John 5)
A man who was born blind (John 9)

#7B: According to Dies Domini which should be the special day to

alleviate the suffering of our fellow human beings?
“If Sunday is a day of joy, Christians should declare by their actual behavior that we cannot be
happy "on our own". They look around to find people who may need their help. It may be that in
their neighborhood or among those they know there are sick people, elderly people, children or
immigrants who precisely on Sundays feel more keenly their isolation, needs and suffering. It is
true that commitment to these people cannot be restricted to occasional Sunday gestures. But
presuming a wider sense of commitment, why not make the Lord's Day a more intense time of
sharing, encouraging all the inventiveness of which Christian charity is capable? Inviting to a
meal people who are alone, visiting the sick, providing food for needy families, spending a few
hours in voluntary work and acts of solidarity: these would certainly be ways of bringing into
people's lives the love of Christ received at the Eucharistic table.”

#8A: According to the Bible, which day will be kept when God creates a
new heaven and a new earth?

Isaiah 66:22, 23:

"For as the new heavens and the new earth which I will make shall remain before Me," says the
Lord, “So shall your descendants and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass that from
one New Moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, all flesh shall come to worship
before Me," says the Lord.”

#8B: According to Dies Domini which day will be keep when history as
we know it comes to an end?

Paragraph #84:

“From Sunday to Sunday, enlightened by Christ, she goes forward towards the unending Sunday
of the heavenly Jerusalem, which "has no need of the sun or moon to shine upon it, for the glory
of God is its light and its lamp is the Lamb" (Revelation 21:23).”

#9A: According to the Bible, which day of the week was kept holy by the
Blessed Virgin Mary, the mother of Jesus?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 272 of 369
Luke 23:55, 56:

“And the women who had come with Him from Galilee followed after, and they observed the tomb
and how His body was laid. 56 Then they returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils. And they
rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment.”

#9B: According to Dies Domini, which day of the week did the Blessed
Virgin Mary venerate and keep?

“I entrust this Apostolic Letter to the intercession of the Blessed Virgin, that it may be received
and put into practice by the Christian community. Without in any way detracting from the
centrality of Christ and his Spirit, Mary is always present in the Church's Sunday. It is the
mystery of Christ itself which demands this: indeed, how could she who is Mater Domini [Lord’s
mother] and Mater Ecclesiae [mother of the church] fail to be uniquely present on the day which
is both dies Domini [Lord’s Day] and dies Ecclesiae? [Church’s Day]”

#10A: According to the Bible, of how much value are the traditions of
men that contradict the written word of God?

“And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” (Mark 7:7)

#10B: According to Dies Domini, by whose authority was the day of

worship changed from Sabbath to Sunday?

In Dies Domini John Paul (presumably in order to build bridges with Protestants) made a valiant
effort to prove that the New Testament already contemplated the change from Sabbath to
Sunday.

In paragraphs 20, 21 John Paul II provides a seemingly impressive list of things that occurred on
Sunday. This is the very list that is provided by Protestants to defend the observance of Sunday:

Jesus resurrected on the first day of the week

The same day Jesus talked with two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:36)
He appeared to the eleven apostles on the first day of the week (John 20:19)
A week later he appeared to the apostles again on a Sunday (John 20:24-28)
If you count (inclusive reckoning) 50 days after the first-fruits you have another first day
of the week. Thus the church was established on the first day of the week and the Holy
Spirit was poured out on Sunday
The first proclamation of the gospel took place on Sunday
The first baptisms took place on Sunday
This long list is superfluous. The fact is that Jesus did not resurrect on Sunday to make
Sunday holy but rather He resurrected on Sunday because He had to rest in the tomb on
the Sabbath. The Manna episode clearly pointed out that the body of Jesus would see no
corruption on the Sabbath as the Manna did not breed worms or stink on the Sabbath.
John Paul also refers to three other additional texts that Protestants use to try and prove that
the change of the Sabbath was an apostolic phenomenon:
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 273 of 369
 I Corinthians 16:1, 2
Acts 20:7-9
Revelation 1:10

The reason why he quotes these verses is because he wants to give the appearance that Sunday was
the day of worship even in the New Testament.

But the bottom line is that nowhere does the New Testament state that Sunday was [1] made holy
and blessed by God, that [2] we must keep it in honor of the resurrection or [3] that we are to go
to church on that day.

A careful reading of Dies Domini reveals where John Paul II claims that
the change came from:

Paragraph #6:

“It seems more necessary than ever to recover the deep doctrinal foundations underlying the
Church’s precept . . . [In keeping it] “we follow in the footsteps of the age-old tradition of the
Church.’

Paragraph #18:

“Christians . . . made [not God] the first day after the Sabbath a festive day, for that was the day
on which the Lord rose from the dead.”

Paragraph #27:

“Christian reflection” and “pastoral practice” changed it

Paragraph #63:

“Christians, called as they are to proclaim the liberation won by the blood of Christ, felt that they
had the authority to transfer the meaning of the Sabbath to the day of the resurrection.”

Paragraph #81:

“The spiritual and pastoral riches of Sunday, as it has been handed on to us by tradition, are truly
great.”

The amazing thing is that the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the Sabbath has been changed
in the new dispensation but they continue to practice most of the things of the old dispensation.
They have temples, altars, incense, vestments, chalices, literal sacrifice of the Mass, etc. They have
all the remnants from Judaism but they refuse to keep the Sabbath.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 274 of 369
The pope states in Dies Domini that the Sabbath was the day of the old covenant and calls it the
Jewish Sabbath. The problem with this argument is that the Sabbath was established in Genesis
before sin, before an old covenant and before there was any Jew.

Ellen G. White in The Great Controversy describes the process whereby the apostate Christian
church got rid of the Sabbath:
“The arch-deceiver had not completed his work. He was resolved to gather the Christian world
under his banner and to exercise his power through his vice-regent, the proud pontiff who claimed
to be the representative of Christ [Vicarius Filii Dei]. Through half-converted pagans, ambitious
prelates, and world-loving churchmen he accomplished his purpose. Vast councils were held from
time to time, in which the dignitaries of the church were convened from all the world. In nearly
every council the Sabbath which God instituted was pressed down a little lower, while the
Sunday was correspondingly exalted. Thus the pagan festival came finally to be honored as a
divine institution, while the Bible Sabbath was pronounced a relic of Judaism, and its observers
were declared to be accursed.” Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 53.

Daniel Seven’s View of the Judgment

The first question we must ask is: Where does the judgment of Daniel 7 take place, in heaven or
on earth? There are at least three reasons why this judgment transpires in heaven. 1) As we have
already seen (page 2), the prose sections of Daniel 7 describe earthly events while the poetry
sections describe heavenly scenes. All judgment passages in Daniel 7 are in poetry—a clear
indication that the judgment is taking place in heaven. 2) The Son of Man goes before the Ancient
of Days for the judgment. It is clear that the Ancient of Days is God the Father whose dwelling
place is in heaven not earth (Matthew 6:9). 3) The timing of the judgment also helps us understand
that it is transpiring in heaven.
Three times in Daniel 7 we are told that the judgment would take place after the nefarious work of
the little horn. In fact, we are told that the judgment was to be God’s response to the evil dominion
of the little horn (verse 8 followed by verses 9-14; verse 21 followed by verse 22; verse 25 followed
by verses 26-27). As we have previously shown, the dominion of the little horn represents the
Papacy’s supremacy from 538-1798. Obviously, the little horn cannot be judged before its period
of dominion is over, so the judgment must have begun sometime after 1798.
This judgment not only transpires after 1798 but it also takes place before the second coming. And
why is this? Because in Daniel 7:13 Christ goes to the Father in heaven to judge and only after
He has finished does He come back to earth to give the kingdom to His people. The same sequence
is found in the book of Revelation. In Revelation 14:6-12 we find God’s final warning message
to the world. Three angels are seen descending from heaven to deliver this three-part message...
The first angel (Revelation 14:7) announces that the hour of God’s judgment ‘has come’ (past
tense in Greek). It is clear that the judgment begins before the second and third angels have
delivered their messages. If the judgment begins before the second and third angels’ messages are
delivered, then the judgment must be before the second coming. It would be nonsensical to say
that Jesus will come before the second and third angels’ messages have been delivered Not until
all three messages have been delivered is Jesus seen seated on the cloud coming to the earth!
(Revelation 14:14)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 275 of 369
Needless to say, this proves that the judgment did not take place at the cross or in the time of the
apostles because the little horn had not yet ruled. Paul makes it crystal clear that the judgment was
still future in his day (Acts 17:30-31; I Corinthians 5:10). The above perspective also proves that
we are not judged the moment we die. After all, why would God proclaim a specific hour for the
judgment to begin if people already went to heaven or hell when they died? If the judgment begins
after 1798 and before the second coming, then it did not take place when people died.
The Bible is very clear that the location of the judgment is the most holy place of the sanctuary
where the Ark of the Covenant and the law are found. Since 1798 there has been no earthly most
holy place so the judgment must have begun in heaven, not on earth!
Another question comes to the fore: Who is the judge in this heavenly judgment? The Bible seems
to be equivocal on this point. But is it really? Let’s consider the evidence.
Daniel 7 informs us three times that the Ancient of Days is the judge (verses 9, 13, 22). This would
seem to indicate that God the Father is the judge. However, there are other Biblical texts which
indicate that the Father judges no man but has committed all judgment to the Son of Man. In II
Corinthians 5:10 the apostle Paul tells us that we must all stand before the great judgment seat of
Christ. And John 5:22, 27 unequivocally states that the Father has committed all judgment to the
Son. What is all the more amazing about these verses in the gospel of John is that they have three
clear links with the judgment scene in Daniel 7: God, the Son of man, and judgment. How do we
solve this apparent discrepancy? An analogous case will help us understand that there is no
discrepancy at all.
In the Bible, God the Father is identified as the Creator (Revelation 4:11). Yet the Bible tells us
that the Father executed the works of creation through Jesus (John 1:1-3; Colossians 1:16-17;
Hebrews 1:2). In other words, the Father performed the work of creation through the
instrumentality of His Son. The Father is the Master Architect and the Son is the Master Builder.
In similar fashion, the apostle Paul tells us in Acts 17:30-31 that the Father will judge the world
through ‘that Man whom He has appointed.’ Ellen White clarifies:
“Says the Psalmist: ‘Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou hadst formed the
earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, Thou art God.’ Psalm 90:2. It is He, the
source of all being, and the fountain of all law, that is to preside in the judgment. And the holy
angels as ministers and witnesses, in number ‘ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of
thousands,’ attend this great tribunal.” (Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 479 emphasis
supplied

“Above the distractions of the earth He sits enthroned; all things are open to His divine survey;
and from His great and calm eternity He orders that which His providence sees best.” (Ellen G.
White, The Ministry of Healing, p. 417)
We conclude, then, that the Father presides the judgment in a supervisory role, while the Son is
the active agent who deals with the ‘nuts and bolts.’
Two things strike us about this judgment scene. One is its awesome solemnity and the other its
intense movement. The expression ‘Ancient of Days’ underlines the Father’s eternity, while the
white garments and hair represent His spotless moral purity and uprightness. The throne ablaze
with flames and the wheels as burning fire represent the purging process of the judgment (see,

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 276 of 369
Malachi 3:3-5; Matthew 3:12; Psalm 50:3; 97:1-14; Isaiah 30:27-28). The Father’s sovereign
will is implemented by millions of angels who stand before His throne, an idea to which we will
return shortly.
The emphasis on movement is obvious. Notice the progression: First thrones are ‘cast down.’ At
this point no one is sitting on them (7:9). The Chaldee word for ‘cast down’ is the same that is
used to describe Daniel being ‘cast’ into the lions’ den and his three friends being ‘cast’ into the
fiery furnace. It is also the same word which Daniel used to depict the work of casting down that
the little horn performed in Daniel 8: 10, 11, 12 The little horn cast down the place of the sanctuary,
the stars and the truth but now God will respond by turning the tables and ‘casting down’ thrones
to judge it for its misbehavior. After the thrones were ‘cast down,’ (which clearly shows that they
were not there before!) the Ancient of Days ‘did sit.’ The question immediately suggests itself:
Where was the Father before He sat down? Was He just standing there where the thrones were put
in place or was He in some other location and then came to where the thrones were placed? Daniel
7:9 does not tell us but Daniel 7:22 does. We are told there, that the Ancient of Days came to the
place of judgment which means He was not there before (The same Aramaic word is used in Daniel
7:13 where the Son of man ‘came’ and was ‘brought’ before the Father). Once again we ask:
Where was the Father before he sat down on his newly placed throne?
The answer to this question is found in the Hebrew sanctuary. There were four key places in the
Hebrew sanctuary: the encampment, the court, the holy place and the most holy place. The
encampment was the place where needy sinners resided. The court was the location where the
sacrifices were offered. In the holy place the blood of the sacrifices was applied by the priest and
in the most holy place sins were blotted out once a year at the end of the year.
It is obvious that the encampment and the court symbolized the earth. It is on earth where needy
sinners reside and it was on earth where Jesus Christ was sacrificed for sin. Where did Jesus go
upon His ascension? The Bible tells us that He sat down at the right hand of God (his role as king
of the kingdom of grace. After all, kings sit on thrones) and that He was standing at the right hand
of God (His role as ministering High Priest, because priests stand ministering before God) [Acts
7:55; Hebrews 1:3]. Obviously, both the Father and the Son were in the same place upon the
ascension. But, which place? There can be no doubt that it is the holy place. And why is this? The
geography of the Hebrew sanctuary dictates it because after the court was the holy place.
Those who believe that Jesus went directly into the most holy place upon His ascension are at a
loss to explain why Jesus would leap from the court to the most holy place upon His ascension
thus totally bypassing the holy place. Both Peter and Paul clearly inform us that Jesus went to
heaven with His blood to be our intercessor, a work which clearly belongs to the holy place
(Hebrews 7:25-26; I Timothy 2:5; Romans 8:34; Acts 2:16-39). This is why Jesus, after His
ascension, is depicted as one walking among the seven candlesticks and ministering before the
golden altar of incense (Revelation 1; 8:3-5). It doesn’t take the brain of a rocket scientist to figure
out that if the Father and the Son were in the holy place in 1798 and then moved for the judgment
at some point thereafter, they must have moved to the most holy place. There are no other options
because the work of judgment must be performed in the most holy place where the Ark of the
Covenant and the Law of God are found!! (Study Revelation 11:15-19 where this is made crystal
clear). Thus we conclude that both the Father and the Son were in the holy place until the beginning
of the judgment.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 277 of 369
But sometime after 1798, the Father moved from the holy to the most holy place. This movement
is highlighted by the fact that the Father’s throne, as seen in the synonymous parallelism, has
wheels—fiery wheels!! [‘His throne was ablaze with flames, its wheels were a burning fire,’
[NASB] The angels actually move the wheels (Daniel 7:10; see the description of the same throne
in Ezekiel 1) as they bring the Father into the most holy place. But note that there is not only one
throne. There are thrones [plural]. How many are there and who sits upon them? We are not told
in Daniel 7 but one thing is certain, it is not the angels who sit on the thrones. How do we know
this? The Bible makes it clear that the angels are constantly on the move. They are ministering
spirits sent out to minister to those who will inherit salvation (Hebrews 1:14). In the Bible the
angels always stand before God and are sent to minister throughout the universe. In fact, in Ezekiel
1 the angels are in constant movement, never having a restful moment! Notice the following
awesome description given by Ellen G. White:
“The Bible shows us God in His high and holy place, not in a state of inactivity, not in silence and
solitude, but surrounded by ten thousand times ten thousand and thousands of thousands of holy
beings, all waiting to do His will. Through these messengers, He is in active communication with
every part of His dominion. By His Spirit He is everywhere present. Through the agency of His
Spirit and His angels He ministers to the children of men.” (Ellen G. White, The Ministry of
Healing, p. 417)
Revelation 5:11 makes it abundantly clear that God is surrounded by ten thousand times ten
thousand and thousands of thousands of angels. But it is not the angels who sit upon the thrones
but rather the 24 elders (Revelation 4:4). As we study Daniel 7 and Revelation 4-5 together, we
discover that there are 24 thrones and the elders sit upon them. But who these elders are and what
their role is remains to be seen. There is undoubtedly a close link between Daniel 7 and Revelation
4-5 which we must return to later, but before we do, we must make a few remarks about the
relationship between Daniel 7 and Ezekiel 1-11. Even a hasty glance at these two passages will
reveal their close relationship. In both we have a chariot-throne, angels who guide the wheels, fire,
clouds, and an awesome being who sits on the chariot-throne in both, the idea of judgment is at
the forefront.
It should not surprise us that Daniel and Ezekiel spoke in similar terms because they were
contemporaries. A thorough study of Ezekiel 1 is far beyond the scope of this paper, but as William
Shea has shown elsewhere, Ezekiel 1 describes the journey of God from heaven to earth to judge
apostate Jerusalem. The date for Ezekiel 1 is 592 B. C. It is of critical importance to remember
that in Ezekiel it is God’s apostate people who are in view. They are committing abominations,
the greatest of which is sun-worship (8:16), they are called a harlot (chapter 16), they are shedding
innocent blood, the priests do violence to the law, and prophets and kings are corrupt but in their
midst is a remnant who sigh and cry because of the abominations which are being committed.
These will be sealed for salvation while the apostate ones will be marked for destruction (9:1-6).
Finally, the Shekinah departs (11:22-23), the city is left desolate and Nebuchadnezzar comes and
executes God’s judgment upon it in 586 B. C. Like Daniel, Ezekiel presents three steps in the
judgment process: Investigation (9:1-4), sentence (11:22-23, the Shekinah leaves), execution of
the sentence (9:5-6).
I believe that what happened with Jerusalem locally and historically (Ezekiel’s view) is a type of
what will take place universally and prophetically (Daniel’s view). In other words, Ezekiel depicts

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 278 of 369
the type while Daniel presents the antitype. In Ezekiel God comes to judge Jerusalem, but in Daniel
7 God comes to judge a worldwide apostate Christianity.
As we have already shown, Daniel seven’s little horn symbolizes an apostate Christian power.
This power is committing abominations (Matthew 24:15; Revelation 17:5; Daniel 11:31), it is
described as a harlot (Revelation 17:1), it sheds innocent blood (Revelation 17:6), it thinks it
can change the law (Daniel 7:25), it persecutes a remnant who remain faithful to God (Daniel
7:21, 25). God’s faithful ones will be sealed for salvation (Revelation 7:1-4) whereas the apostates
will be marked for destruction (Revelation 14:9-11). The Shekinah will depart the heavenly
temple (Revelation 15:5-8) and then desolation and destruction will come upon the apostates in
the form of the seven last plagues (Revelation 16-19). The key point we should remember here is
that both Daniel and Ezekiel portray a judgment process which has God’s professed people in
view. Clearly, among those who claim to be God’s people, there are genuine and counterfeit
believers. The judgment process has the purpose of separating these two groups.
Now let’s take a look at the relationship between Daniel 7 and Revelation 4-5. The striking
similarities between these two passages have led some scholars to conclude that they are both
describing the same historical event. Is this true? Are both Daniel 7 and Revelation 4-5 describing
the judgment which begins sometime after 1798? I believe the answer to this question is a
resounding no!! Why, then, are there so many similarities? Simply because the two passages are
portraying two different events where the same beings are present.

It is clear that the scene of Revelation 4-5 is describing the inauguration of Christ’s priesthood
upon His ascension to heaven. We are told in Acts 1:9-11 that Jesus was taken to heaven in a cloud.
Before Jesus arrives, the Father is seen sitting upon His throne by himself (Revelation 4:2).
Surrounding Him are elders on 24 thrones (4:4). There is no evidence that the Father moved to this
throne from somewhere else, He is simply there. At this point Jesus has not yet arrived. But in 5:6
Jesus appears on the scene, not as the Son of man of Daniel 7, but as a lamb ‘as if it had been
slain.’ A song is then sung extolling Jesus as the one who was slain to redeem mankind (5:9).
Revelation 5:11 uses almost the same terminology as Daniel 7 to describe the angelic hosts.
As we have already seen, Jesus ascended to the Father in the holy place for His inauguration. Upon
His arrival, the Father was waiting for Him as were the 24 elders, and the angelic hosts to celebrate
His work of redemption as the Lamb of God. This is the glorious event which Peter described in
his eloquent sermon of Acts, chapter 2. Ellen G. White makes this clear in her book, The Desire
of Ages, pp. 831-835. All the beings which would later be present for the beginning of the judgment
were also present for His inauguration. This is why the two scenes appear so similar.
In Daniel 7 the entire heavenly entourage moves from the holy to the most holy place. Notice that
when this happens, a different song is sung extolling God as judge and king! (Revelation 11:15-
19). Ellen White describes this glorious movement in Early Writings, pp. 54-56 where she is
clearly making reference to the vision of Daniel 7. In other words, Revelation 4-5 describes Jesus
going from earth to heaven on a cloud to His Father upon His ascension to be invested as High
Priest. On the other hand, in Daniel 7, He is portrayed as coming on clouds from the holy to the
most holy place to His Father in 1844 to be invested as King. The same beings are present on
both occasions and this is why the scenes are so similar. It is rather obvious that the coming of
Jesus to the Ancient of Days cannot be at the ascension because at that time books were not opened
and the little horn had not yet ruled. Daniel 7 makes it crystal clear that the Son of Man comes to

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 279 of 369
the Ancient of Days only after the little horn has done it nefarious work. This judgment cannot be
at the second coming either because at that time Jesus comes to the earth rather than going to the
Ancient of Days.
In summary, Daniel 7 presents a clear sequence of events. First, thrones are put in place. Then, the
angels bring the Father on His chariot-throne from the holy to the most holy place and He sits
down on His throne. The 24 elders then sit on their thrones. Then the Son of man is brought by the
clouds of angels in the chariot-throne to where the Father had been brought. This movement of the
Son of man is expressed by the verbs, ‘came . . . came . . . they [notice the plural, the clouds]
brought Him near before Him.’ (Daniel 7:13). Then the judgment sits [is inaugurated] and the
books are opened (Daniel 7:10). The text is very clear that Jesus does not come to the earth at this
point but rather goes to the Ancient of Days. Regarding this, Ellen G. White affirms:
“The coming of Christ here described is not His second coming to the earth. He comes to the
Ancient of Days in heaven to receive dominion and glory and a kingdom, which will be given Him
at the close of His work as a mediator. It is this coming, and not His second advent to the earth,
that was foretold in the prophecy to take place at the termination of the 2300 days in 1844.” (Ellen
G. White, The Great Controversy, pp. 479-480)

The Millerites and most contemporary Christians have erroneously assumed that Daniel 7:13-14
is describing the second coming of Jesus to this earth. One reason for this misunderstanding is that
Jesus is here spoken of as coming on the clouds of heaven, an expression which clearly refers to
the second coming in other contexts (Revelation 1:7; Matthew 24:30, 31). However, when Jesus
ascended to heaven, he was received by a cloud (Acts 1:9-11) and on the Day of Atonement
[Israel’s Day of Judgment] the pillar of cloud moved into the most holy place (Leviticus 16:1-2).
Furthermore, when God came down from heaven to the Jerusalem temple to judge Israel in the
days of Ezekiel, He was surrounded by a cloud. The distinction between cloud [singular] and
clouds [plural] does not seem to be significant because Revelation 14:14 describes Jesus’ second
coming on a cloud [singular] whereas the same event is described in Revelation 1:7 as Jesus
coming with clouds [plural]. Needless to say, the Bible identifies clouds as symbolic of angels
(see, Psalm 104:3-4 and compare Matthew 24:30, 31) and. Daniel 7:13 personifies [or should we
say, ‘angelifies’] the clouds by saying that they brought Jesus into the presence of the Ancient of
Days.
Significantly, there is no evidence that the Son of man sits down during this judgment and the
reason for this is that Jesus is the Advocate and will not occupy the throne until He receives the
kingdom at the conclusion of the judgment.
And what is the nature of this heavenly judgment? In other words, what takes place during this
investigative pre-Advent judgment? Before we can answer this question, we must ask another: Is
the judgment of Daniel 7 restricted to the little horn and those whom it oppressed during the 1260-
year period or does it include all believers from all periods of human history as well?
There can be no doubt that the central focus of the judgment scene in Daniel 7 is upon the little
horn and the people whom it oppressed during the 1260 years. But does this exclude other believers
from other historical periods? Not necessarily.
Perhaps an analogy will help us understand what I mean. When we read the Sabbath commandment
as it is recorded in Deuteronomy 5:12-15 we might be led to conclude that it was given only to
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 280 of 369
literal Israel because it refers to their specific historical situation. God, in essence, is saying to
Israel: ‘I delivered you from slavery and gave you rest, therefore you are to keep the Sabbath in
commemoration of your emancipation.’ Does this restricted use of the Sabbath commandment
mean that it was given only to literal Israel? Was it not given also for the entire human race? Other
texts make it abundantly clear that the Sabbath was given for all people of all ages (Exodus 20:8-
11; Genesis 2:1-3; Mark 2:27). Does the restricted use of the Sabbath commandment in
Deuteronomy 5 cancel out its broader use in other texts of Scripture? Absolutely not! We might
just as well ask: Does the restricted use of the judgment in Daniel 7 to the period of the little horn
cancel out the broader application to the entire human race? Of course not! At the conclusion of
this judgment we are told that the saints received the kingdom. Are we to understand that only the
saints who lived during the 1260 years will receive this kingdom? Of course not! Other texts of
Scripture broaden the view by telling us that all the redeemed will inherit the kingdom. So we
conclude that the specialized view of the judgment in Daniel 7 does not exclude the broader view
in other portions of the Bible.

Now let’s return to our original question. What is the nature of the judgment? In order to
understand what takes place during this judgment we must first understand the relationship
between the ‘books’ [plural] and the ‘book’ [singular]. Let’s take a look at the ‘books’ first.
Daniel 7:10 informs us that the judgment sat and ‘the books [plural] were opened.’ And, what is
in the books? The answer is actually quite simple. The books contain a complete record of our
lives. Nothing is missingBnot a thought, a feeling, an act, a word. God keeps an exact transcript of
each person’s life from conception till death. Our life story is there (Psalm 139:16), our secrets
(Ecclesiastes 12:13), our words (Matthew 12:34-37), our works (Revelation 22:12), our evil
deeds (Isaiah 65:5-6), our tears (Psalm 56:8). Our good deeds are written in the books of
remembrance (Malachi 3:16). So to speak, God has another Stephen P. Bohr in heaven in written
form. This record of each person’s character, self-identity or individuality is carefully preserved
in the heavenly books. Regarding this, Ellen G. White remarks:
“The grand judgment is taking place, and has been going on for some time. Now the Lord says,
Measure the temple and the worshipers thereof. Remember when you are walking the streets about
your business, God is measuring you; when you are attending your household duties, when you
engage in conversation, God is measuring you. Remember that your words and actions are being
daguerreotyped [photographed] in the books of heaven, as the face is reproduced by the artist on
the polished plate. . .” (The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, ‘Ellen G. White
Comments,’ volume 7, p. 972, emphasis supplied
“Accurately recorded in the books of heaven are the sneers and trivial remarks made by sinners
who pay no heed to the call of mercy when Christ is represented to them by a servant of God. As
the artist takes on the polished glass a true picture of a human face, so God daily places upon the
books of heaven an exact representation of the character of every individual." (Ellen G. White,
Manuscript 105, 1901 as found in The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, volume 4, p.
1171, emphasis supplied)
“Remember that this world is God’s daguerreotyped [photography] office. The pictures of all who
live here, old and young, are being made in the books of heaven. What shall the likeness be?”
(Ellen G. White, Manuscript Releases, volume 3, p. 352, emphasis supplied)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 281 of 369
This exact transcript of every nook and cranny of our lives is what the Bible calls Athe spirit.@
Notice the following awesome statement:
“Our personal identity is preserved in the resurrection, though not the same particles of matter or
material substance as went into the grave. The wondrous works of God are a mystery to man. The
spirit, the character of man, is returned to God, there to be preserved. In the resurrection every
man will have his own character. God in His own time will call forth the dead, giving again the
breath of life, and bidding the dry bones live. The same form will come forth, but it will be free
from disease and every defect. It lives again bearing the same individuality of features, so that
friend will recognize friend. There is no law of God in nature which shows that God gives back
the same identical particles of matter which composed the body before death. God shall give the
righteous dead a body that will please Him.” (The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary,
‘Ellen G. White Comments,’ volume 6, p. 1093, emphasis supplied)
Notice that it is not only the breath of life which returns to God when we die. It is our self-identity
[that which makes me ‘me’ in distinction to others] which is preserved there until the day of the
resurrection. Does the Bible corroborate this view of Ellen White that the spirit is the character of
man? Absolutely!
In the above statement, Ellen White is actually commenting on Job 19:25-27 where Job expresses
the assurance that when he resurrects, it will be he himself and not another. In other words, he will
receive is own self-identity at the resurrection. Besides Job 19:25-27, there are three other texts
which show that Ellen White was correct in her assessment. Luke 8 contains the story of the
resurrection of Jairus’ daughter. When Jesus called her to rise, we are told that ‘her spirit returned
to her.’ (Luke 8:55) Notice that it does not say: ‘the spirit returned to her.’ What God gave back
to her was the breath of life along with her own self-identity. This is why the flow of her thoughts
picked up exactly where it had left off when she died. She was hungry when she died and she was
hungry when she rose from the dead.
The same can be said about Jesus when He died on the cross. When He cried out: ‘Father, into
your hands I commend my spirit,’ (Luke 23:46). He was not merely saying: ‘Into your hands I
commend my breath of life.’ He was really saying, ‘Into your hands I commend my self-identity,
my individuality, my character.’ When Jesus resurrected, He picked up at the very instant where
he had left off when He died.
The same can be said of Stephen. As he was being stoned, he cried out, ‘Lord Jesus, receive my
spirit.’ (Acts 7:59) Notice that he does not say ‘the spirit’ but rather, ‘my spirit.’ It was His self-
identity or the record of his life that he wanted Jesus to preserve until the day of the resurrection.
Similarly, when Jesus resurrected Lazarus, there can be no doubt that Lazarus’ thoughts began
where they had left off when he died. The exact character or self-identity which God had preserved
in the books was returned to him intact!! Though not directly related to the pre-Advent judgment,
the same can be said about the wicked when they resurrect after the millennium. Notice the
following statement:
“There are kings and generals who conquered nations, valiant men who never lost a battle, proud,
ambitious warriors whose approach made kingdoms tremble. In death these experienced no
change. As they come up from the grave, they resume the current of their thoughts just where it
ceased. They are actuated by the same desire to conquer that ruled them when they fell.” (Ellen
G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 664)
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 282 of 369
Why do wicked resurrect wicked and the righteous, resurrect righteous? Simply because they are
given the very ‘spirit,’ character or self-identity they went into the grave with. So, we conclude
that the ‘books’ contain an exact transcript of each person’s life. But, what is contained in the
‘book’ [singular]?
An examination of the Biblical evidence clearly reveals that the ‘book’ contains the names of all
who have professed the name of Jesus (Philippians 4:3; Daniel 12:1; Psalm 69:28; Exodus
32:32-33; Luke 10:20; Revelation 13:8; 17:8; 21:27). There are righteous people who have
claimed the name of Jesus and also wicked people who have claimed His name (Matthew 7:21-
23). The purpose of the pre-Advent judgment is to weed out the professors from those who truly
received Jesus.
Now that we have identified what is in the ‘books’ and what is in the ‘book,’ we can study how
they relate to each other in the judgment process. Let’s use Abel as our example. Ellen White has
made it very clear that the pre-Advent investigative judgment began in 1844 with the dead. She
also informs us that the dead are judged chronologically, that is, starting with those who first lived
on the earth. Notice the following statement:
“As the books of record are opened in the judgment, the lives of all who have believed on Jesus
come in review before God. Beginning with those who first lived upon the earth, our Advocate
presents the cases of each successive generation, and closes with the living.” (Ellen G. White, The
Great Controversy, p. 482, emphasis supplied
If the judgment began in 1844 with those who first lived upon the earth and continues with each
successive generation in chronological order, then it is certain that Abel (the fourth person to live
on the earth), was judged in 1844 or shortly thereafter. The Bible tells us that all must appear
before the great judgment seat of Christ (II Corinthians 5:10). The question is: How could Abel
appear before the judgment seat of Christ when he was dead in 1844? The answer is quite simple:
Abel did not need to appear there in person because the exact transcripts of his life—with not a jot
or tittle missing—are there in the books. He is judged in absentia just like a person can graduate
from school in absentia. Ellen White states the following with Biblical corroboration:
“Those who in the judgment are ‘accounted worthy’ will have a part in the resurrection of the just.
Jesus said: ‘They which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world and the resurrection from
the dead . . . are equal unto the angels; and are the children of the resurrection.’ Luke 20:35, 36.
And again He declares that ‘they that have done good’ shall come forth ‘unto the resurrection of
life.’ John 5:29. The righteous dead will not be raised until after the judgment at which they are
accounted worthy of the ‘resurrection of life.’ Hence they will not be present in person at the
tribunal when their records are examined and their cases decided.” (Ellen G. White, The Great
Controversy, p. 482, emphasis supplied
Now, Abel’s name is found in the Book of Life [singular] because he claimed to receive Jesus as
his personal Savior (Hebrews 11:4). As the books [plural] are opened, it is shown, beyond any
doubt, that Abel truly confessed and overcame sin by the blood of Jesus. The sins he has truly
repented of and confessed are registered in the books of heaven but they are covered with the blood
of Jesus. In fact, Jesus represents Abel in court as his Advocate. Regarding this, Ellen White
remarks: ‘Jesus will appear as their [the righteous’] advocate, to plead in their behalf before God.”
(Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 482) Abel’s case is examined by the heavenly court
and he is pronounced ‘not guilty’ by virtue of Christ’s blood. At this moment, all of Abel’s sins
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 283 of 369
are blotted out from the books to be remembered no more. The name of Abel will then be secure
in the Book of Life forever and when Jesus returns, He will resurrect Abel (Hebrews 11:35) and
give him back the self-identity (‘spirit’) he possessed before he died. But there is one thing which
will not be given back to him—his sins—for these have been blotted out from the books in the
judgment!! Notice how Ellen White continues the statement above:

“Every name is mentioned, every case closely investigated. Names are accepted, names rejected.
When any have sins remaining upon the books of record, unrepented of and unforgiven, their
names will be blotted out of the book of life, and the record of their good deeds [notice that the
bad deeds are not erased at this time because they will come up during the millennium. We will
come back to this when we analyze Revelation 20:11-15] will be erased from the book of God’s
remembrance [Ellen White quotes Exodus 32:33 and Ezekiel 18:24 as the Biblical foundation for
what she has just stated]. . . . All who have truly repented of sin, and by faith claimed the blood of
Christ as their atoning sacrifice, have had pardon entered against their names in the books of
heaven; as they have become partakers of the righteousness of Christ, and their characters are
found to be in harmony with the law of God, their sins will be blotted out, and they themselves will
be accounted worthy of eternal life.” [Ellen White provides Isaiah 43:25; Revelation 3:5;
Matthew 10:32, 33 as the Biblical corroboration for the blotting out of the sins of the righteous]
(Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 482-483) emphasis supplied
But the story of Abel would be incomplete without Cain. After all, we always speak of Cain and
Abel. What about Cain? Did he profess to worship and serve God? As a matter of fact, he did.
Genesis 4 tells us that Cain came to worship God. He brought an offering but contrary to Abel’s
offering, it was bloodless, and ‘without the shedding of blood, there is no remission’ of sin
(Hebrews 9:11). By neglecting to offer blood, Cain was rejecting Jesus as his Savior. Yet he
claimed to be a true worshiper and so, his name must have been in the Book of Life until his name
came up in the judgment
When Cain killed Abel a great injustice was done. This is why Genesis 4:11 tells us that the blood
of Abel cried out from the ground. The righteous Abel was slain by unrighteous Cain and yet both
of them claimed to worship the true God. Obviously, this terrible wrong had to be righted, but
how?
When Cain’s name came up in 1844 the entire universe saw that while he had claimed to serve
God he really had clung to sin and refused to be cleansed by the blood. His lawless life and
impenitence were clearly revealed, as the books of record were opened. Jesus could not be his
Advocate because Cain had refused to be cleansed by the blood. His vile act of murder was seen
in all its hideousness and it was determined that Abel was right and Cain was wrong. This was the
moment of Abel’s vindication and the cry of his innocent blood was answered. Now all the good
deeds which Cain had performed in his life were blotted out and then his name was blotted out
from the Book of Life. However, all his evil deeds remained on the books of record to be examined
in heaven during the millennium and in the white throne judgment after the millennium (more on
this in a few moments).
Though we have spoken first of Abel and then of Cain, we must remember that in point of time,
Cain was judged first and then immediately after (Abel was the next person born after Cain) Abel
was judged. Thus the murderer was found guilty of Abel’s innocent blood and then immediately
afterwards, Abel was vindicated and reckoned worthy of eternal life. In other words, the judgment

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 284 of 369
on earth was reversedBthe martyr whom Cain had reckoned to be worthy of death, was reckoned
in the heavenly court as worthy of life in the future kingdom while the murderer who had lived in
sin was accounted worthy of death and will be deprived of the kingdom.
In the light of the story of Cain and Abel we can now better comprehend the judgment in Daniel
7. In this chapter, the little horn plays the role of Cain while the saints of the Most High play the
role of Abel. While in Genesis we have two individuals, in Daniel 7 we have two corporate groups
composed of individuals. But the process and principles of the judgment are the same. Let’s take
a look.
In Daniel 7 the little horn is judged first and then the saints are judged afterwards. The character
of the little horn resembles the character of Cain—it is lawless, it murders the saints of the Most
High, it tramples on the sanctuary and its services, particularly the daily (which represents the
sacrifice of Christ for sin). And yet, as we have seen, the little horn (those individuals who belong
to this system) claims to worship and serve the true God. Those who belonged to this vile power
must have had their names in the Book of Life because they claimed to be doing the work of
Christ!! During the 1260 years this power slew the saints of the Most High and their blood, like
Abel’s, cried out for justice (Revelation 6:9-11). In earthly tribunals God’s people were falsely
accused and condemned to die. There was no one to plead their cause. The wicked were portrayed
as righteous and the righteous were portrayed as wicked. Obviously this was a travesty in justice
which needed to be rectified. Ellen White tells us that every single act of injustice done to God’s
people during the 1260 years was written in the books of record. Speaking of the Inquisition, she
remarks:
“In the thirteenth century was established that most terrible of all engines of the papacyBthe
Inquisition. The prince of darkness wrought with the leaders of the papal hierarchy. In their secret
councils Satan and his angels controlled the minds of evil men, while unseen in the midst stood an
angel of God, taking the fearful record of their iniquitous decrees and writing the history of deeds
too horrible to appear to human eyes.” (Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 59, emphasis
supplied)
Once again, speaking of the dark record of the papacy, the Lord’s servant comments:

“The history of God’s people during the ages of darkness that followed upon Rome’s supremacy
is written in heaven, but they have little space in human records. Few traces of their existence
can be found, except in the accusations of their persecutors. It was the policy of Rome to obliterate
every trace of dissent from her doctrines or decrees. Everything heretical, whether persons or
writings, she sought to destroy. Expressions of doubt, or questions as to the authority of papal
dogmas, were enough to forfeit life of rich or poor, high or low. Rome endeavored also to destroy
every record of her cruelty toward dissenters. Papal councils decreed that books and writings
containing such records should be committed to the flames. Before the invention of printing, books
were few in number, and in a form not favorable for preservation; therefore there was little to
prevent the Romanists from carrying out their purpose.” (Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy,
pp. 61-62, emphasis supplied)
On May 5, 1487, pope Innocent VIII sent a Bull to the archbishops of France encouraging them to
invoke the support of the king of France, of the Duke of Savoy and of the Lords ‘in order to proceed
with armed hand against the said Waldenses and all other heretics, and to crush them like

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 285 of 369
venomous serpents.’ The pope offered a plenary indulgence to all who participated in this crusade
against the Waldenses and gave the crusaders permission to seize all the possessions of the heretics
and to lose all neighbors and servants from all obligations to them. Referring to the author of this
Bull, Ellen White states:
“Did this haughty potentate expect to meet those words again? Did he know that they were
registered in the books of heaven, to confront him at the judgment?” (Ellen G. White, The Great
Controversy, p. 77, emphasis supplied
And when were these deeds of injustice to be rectified? Why were records of their deeds kept in
the minutest detail? Because they will have to face them again in the judgment of Daniel 7!!
What about the righteous who were mowed down by this evil power? In conjunction with the
condemnation of their oppressors, the righteous will receive a heavenly verdict in their favor. To
the wicked oppressors, Christ now becomes the judge and to the righteous martyrs Jesus now
assumes the role of Advocate. How wonderful! The judge will be our Advocate!! Rather than
fearing the judgment, we should relish it. The apostle Paul made it clear that those who are in
Christ have peace with God (Romans 5:1) and are no longer under condemnation (Romans 8:1,
34; John 5:24) The books of record will reveal that the martyrs are worthy of inheriting the
kingdom and enjoying everlasting life. Their cause will be vindicated. The verdicts of earthly
courts will be reversed. It will be shown that they truly laid hold of Christ even in the times of their
greatest peril. We know this is true because they are called the Amartyrs of Jesus@ (Revelation
17:6) They have not loved their lives even unto death because they have overcome the devil with
the blood of the lamb and the word of their testimony (Revelation 12:10-12). At this point, all
their sins will be blotted out and their names will be made secure in the Book of Life forever!! All
that remains is for Jesus to come from heaven to raise them from the dead (I Thessalonians 4:15-
17; Revelation 20:4) and give them back their ‘spirit’ or self-identity minus the sins which were
blotted out in the pre-Advent judgment. Christ will then give them the kingdom and everlasting
life as an actual possession.

This scenario shows that neither the wicked persecutors nor the martyrs are present personally in
heaven for the judgment. This is made clear by Daniel 7 itself. This judgment is taking place in
heaven while the little horn and the saints are on earth. Furthermore, Revelation 6:10-11 explicitly
tells us that the righteous martyrs were given white robes—that is, they were reckoned worthy of
everlasting life—and told to rest a while until the last martyr is slain. Revelation 14:13 explicitly
tells us that this ‘rest’ takes place when a person dies. Notice that the white robe is given to those
who are dead, because they are told to rest yet a little while. They have been resting to that point
and they will continue to rest until the last martyr dies and then they will be resurrected to reign
with Christ a thousand years (Revelation 20:4). At this time those who ruled on earth will lose
their dominion (God’s people will be kings, Revelation 20:4-6) and God’s people will be given
dominion. This will be the judgment’s great reversal of fortunes!! Incidentally, we can now see
how closely related the doctrines of the judgment and the state of the dead are: If the righteous go
to heaven when they die, why even bother to have a heavenly judgment? And it the wicked go to
hell when they die, why bother to judge them if their destiny has already been determined at death?
Further evidence that the righteous and the wicked are judged in absentia is found in the parables
of Jesus. In Matthew 25 we find the story of the ten virgins. The bride in this parable cannot
represent the faithful members of the church because these go into the wedding as guests!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 286 of 369
Obviously they cannot be guests and the bride at the same time! In Matthew 22:8-14 we find the
same idea. The redeemed are spoken of as the guests so they cannot be the bride. Furthermore, the
righteous and the wicked are not there personally for the wedding for the man without a wedding
garment could not have sneaked into heaven inadvertently! In Luke 12:35-37 we are told that we
should be ready when the Lord returns from the wedding. This must mean that Christ’s wedding
takes place in heaven while God’s people wait for His return on earth. Luke 19:11-15, just like
Daniel 7, makes it absolutely clear that Jesus will receive His kingdom before He comes. The same
idea is set forth in Luke 22:29-30. If the church is not the bride, then who is? Revelation 21:2, 9-
10 states that the New Jerusalem is the bride and Revelation 19:9 indicate that the saved are the
guests who are invited to the wedding so they cannot also be the bride. We cannot emphasize
enough that the saved do not attend the wedding in person but in absentia. Just like we can now
by faith come boldly to the throne of grace (Hebrews 4:16) though we are on earth, even so we
can enter the most holy place by faith to be present for Christ’s wedding with the New Jerusalem.
But someone might object: How is it possible that Jesus marries a city? After all, when we get
married, we marry a person, not an impersonal city. This objection betrays a desire to impose a
western mind-set on an eastern book. You see, in ancient times when a prince was coroneted as
king, it was considered that he had married the kingdom. This is seen, for example, in Exodus
19:5-6 where God chooses Israel as his kingdom of priests at Mount Sinai. But this establishment
of the kingdom is identified as God’s wedding with Israel in Jeremiah 31:32. Thus, Israel is
referred to as God’s bride and as God’s kingdom in the Old Testament. There is no contradiction;
they are two different ways of describing the same reality. Thus, when Israel played the harlot and
broke her wedding vows, God went to divorce court and took away the kingdom. When Israel
returned to the Lord, He gave them back the kingdom, that is to say, he remarried them.
Though not directly related to our present study, the day of a king’s coronation was also considered
the day of his birth. This is why, when David was crowned king, God said to him: ‘You are my
son, today I have begotten thee’ (Psalm 2:9). This is also why, when God made the covenant with
Israel at Mt. Sinai, he employed the analogy of birth to describe the event (Ezekiel 16:8-13). It is
no coincidence that when a king took over the kingdom in antiquity, he began counting his regal
years afresh just like we begin counting our years when we are born or count the number of
anniversaries since we got married. All of this sounds strange to the analytical western mind but it
makes perfect sense to those who are trained to think in eastern categories.
The portrayal of Daniel 7 is clear. Jesus goes to His father to perform the work of judgment. In the
heavenly court the Father legally takes away the kingdom from the little horn and gives it to Jesus,
to whom it rightfully belongs. Then Jesus gives it back to man who lost it in the first place. God
does not take the kingdom back by force. Rather, he takes the little horn to court! This process is
made clear in Daniel 7:14, 18 and 22.

Notably, Daniel 7:27 employ both the singular and the plural:
“Then the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven,
shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,
and all dominions shall serve and obey Him.'
The above analysis helps us better understand how it is that the Father has a kingdom (Matthew
26:29; Luke 9:27), the Son has His kingdom (Matthew 16:28), and Jesus will give His people

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 287 of 369
the kingdom (Luke 12:32; Matthew 25:34). Are there really three kingdoms? No. A careful study
of the Bible reveals that the kingdom originally belonged to the Father. When the world was
created, the Father delegated rulership to Adam and Eve (Genesis 1:26-28; Psalm 8:5-8) Satan
then stole the rulership of this world from Adam and Eve (Luke 4:5-8). At the second coming, this
kingdom will be restored to Jesus (Matthew 16:28) Who will then restore it to His people
(Revelation 20:4; Daniel 7:26-27) At the end of the Millennium, Jesus will then give it to His
Father to whom it belonged in the first place (I Corinthians 15:24-28; Matthew 26:29; Luke
9:27; For more on this, study carefully, Luke 22:29-30).
This study of the judgment would not be complete without taking into account the relationship
between Daniel 7 and 8 and Daniel 12. When the judgment began in 1844, (as described in Daniel
7:9-10, 13; and 8:14) Jesus is portrayed as High Priest. He is seen ministering in the heavenly
sanctuary in both the daily and yearly services in behalf of His people. There is not a hint in these
passages that Jesus has assumed His position as king. In fact, Daniel 7:14, 18, 26-27 makes it
abundantly clear that only at the conclusion of this judgment does Jesus receive the kingdom. So
if Jesus will not become king (we are speaking here, not of the kingdom of grace but of the
kingdom of glory) until after the judgment, then what is He now? The book of Hebrews clearly
indicates that Jesus has been our High Priestly Advocate since His ascension (Hebrews 8:1-2; I
Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 7:25-26; Romans 8:34). In 1844 Jesus did not cease being our High
Priestly Advocate but rather added another function to His ministry—that of Judge. In the Old
Testament cultus the High Priest retained his high priestly garments until the Day of Atonement
was over. If we are now in the antitypical Day of Atonement, Jesus must still be garbed in the
garments of the High Priest. But at the conclusion of the judgment Jesus will lay aside His priestly
vesture and garb himself with the raiment of a king.
And when will this take place? Daniel 12:1 pinpoints the time: It will be when Michael ‘stands
up.’ The expression ‘stand up’ is employed in other places of Daniel 11 to refer to a king who
takes the throne or begins to reign (11:2-3). Notice here that Jesus stands up or begins to reign
before the time of trouble. This must mean that Jesus will receive the kingdom in heaven at the
close of probation before He comes back at the end of the time of trouble.
This fits perfectly with Daniel 7 where Jesus goes to His Father to receive the kingdom but only
delivers it to His people upon His return to the earth. It also squares with the parables of the
kingdom we have previously referred to. This must be the time when He changes His priestly
garments to His kingly robes.
A crucial point has been missed by virtually all commentators and it is this: Jesus is now garbed
as High Priest but when He comes He will be garbed as King of kings and Lord of lords. Revelation
19:11-16 actually describes his raiment. Now, you don’t need the wisdom of a King Solomon to
figure out that if Jesus is now garbed as High Priest but at His coming will be garbed as king, He
must have changed as some point in between. Ellen White was biblically accurate when she stated
that when Michael stands up He will change his priestly garments to kingly ones!!
In summary: Daniel 7:9-10, 13; 8:14 describes the beginning of the heavenly judgment in 1844.
At this time Jesus goes to His Father to receive the kingdom. During the judgment He is both
Advocate and Judge and wears his High Priestly attire. Daniel 12:1, on the other hand, describes
the moment when this judgment comes to an end. Probation closes, Jesus begins to reign and
removes his priestly robes and garbs himself with the garments of a king. Then the time of trouble

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 288 of 369
(before the second coming) transpires at the end of which Jesus returns to earth to give the
kingdom to His people.
This Danielic scenario fits also with the perspective of the book of Revelation. In Revelation 14:7
the announcement is made, ‘the hour of His judgment is come.’ At this point probation has not
closed because the second and third angels’ messages have not yet been proclaimed. This proves
beyond the shadow of any doubt that the judgment begins in heaven before the Advent. After the
three angels’ messages have been proclaimed, the door of probation closes (Revelation 15:5-8)
and Jesus changes His raiment from priestly to kingly robes. The plagues are then poured out
(Revelation 16-18). This is the same time of trouble which is mentioned in Daniel 12:1. Then
Jesus returns triumphantly as King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Revelation 19:11-21) and gives
the kingdom to His people (Revelation 20:4). Don’t miss the point: When Jesus comes He is no
longer garbed as High Priest but rather as King so at some point before His coming He must have
changed His garments.

In order to fully understand the relationship between the coming of the Son of man to the Father
in Daniel 7:13 and the standing up of Michael in Daniel 12:1 it is necessary to keep in mind that
the little horn has two periods of dominion. The first was during the 1260 years when millions of
God’s true children were mowed down. Daniel 7:9-10, 13 describes the moment when Jesus began
the process of vindicating those who were unjustly judged by the little horn.
But prophecy affirms that the little horn will have a second period of dominion when it will once
again slay the children of God. Jesus will also defend these in the heavenly court in the ongoing
process of the judgment before the close of probation (there will be no martyrs after the close of
probation).

This two-stage dominion of the little horn is brought out clearly in Revelation 6:9-11 where the
martyrs of the past cry out for judgment and vengeance and they are told to rest a while until the
rest of the martyrs are slain like they were. Thus two groups of martyrs are brought to view: the
martyrs who were slain by the little horn in the past and the martyrs who will be slain by this
power in the future.
Revelation 13 also describes these two stages of the little horn power (now called the beast). This
horn slew the saints of the Most High during the period of the 42 months (Revelation 13:5, 7).
But after its deadly wound is healed, it will once again proclaim a death decree against God’s
people (Revelation 13:15).
The same panorama can be seen in Daniel 7 and 11. In Daniel 7 the little horn slays the saints of
God for a period of 1260 years. In Daniel 11:31-39 we find a description of the same period only
now the little horn is called ‘the king of the north.’ But at the time of the end (1798) the king of
the south (atheistic communism in the French Revolution) arises against the king of the north (the
papacy) and gives it a deadly wound. But then we are told that the king of north regains its power
and once again goes out to slay many (11:40-45).
Now the main point is this: In Daniel 7:13 Jesus comes to the Father in heaven to vindicate the
cause of those who have been slain by the little horn (as well as the cause of all his children from
all ages who have died before the close of probation). Once all His dead children have been
vindicated, He then turns to vindicate the righteous saints who are alive and to condemn the wicked

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 289 of 369
powers of the earth who wish to slay his living saints. As soon as this work of separation is finished,
probation closes, and Michael (Jesus) stands up and begins to reign. His kingdom is made up
because He has already determined who His subjects are. When the judgment began in Daniel 7:13
Jesus came to vindicate his dead children. In Daniel 12:1 Jesus stands up to defend his living saints
from annihilation by the king of the north!!

We must now come to our last consideration. Though the post-millennial judgment does not
directly come to view in the book of Daniel, it would be well at this point to say a few words about
it because it relates to what we have said about the modus operandi of the judgment in Daniel 7.
At the end of the millennium the holy city will descend from heaven and the wicked will be
resurrected (Revelation 20:6). Though some of these wicked people undoubtedly performed good
deeds in their lifetimes, they now resurrect only with their evil traits. And why is this so? Simply
because they will be given back their own self-identity minus their good deeds which were deleted
when their cases were reviewed during the millennial judgment! The righteous at the second
coming will be given all the good of their lives but nothing of the bad. On the other hand, at the
end of the millennium the wicked are given all the bad of their lives and nothing good. Thus those
outside the city are totally wicked and those inside the city are totally righteous.
Interestingly, Ellen White informs us that the very same prelates and priests who condemned the
saints during the middle Ages will be gathered outside the city. What a judgment reversal has taken
place!! Those who were rulers in the middle Ages are now lost while those who were trampled
upon are royalty. This work of reversal is what Jesus performed when he went into the most holy
place in 1844. Now, after the millennium the results of the pre-advent judgment are clearly
revealed to the enemies of God’s children.

Let’s turn to Revelation 20:11-15 and examine this post-millennial judgment more closely. At the
end of the 1000 years all the wicked will be summoned to the judgment bar of God. The books
(which, we are clearly told, contain their works) will be opened and the record of their lives will
be laid open before the whole universe. Some have wondered why the book of life is brought to
view in this judgment. The passage clearly indicates that the purpose is to show the wicked that
their names are not found in it. And why are their names absent? Simply because they have been
deleted during the millennial judgment!
We can now summarize the biblical view of the judgment:
The righteous dead and living are vindicated in the heavenly court during the pre-Advent
investigative judgment.

The wicked oppressors of God’s people are found wanting in this same judgment.
At the second coming Jesus will resurrect the righteous dead and glorify them along with the
righteous living. All their sins have been deleted in the pre-advent judgment and therefore they
receive only the positive traits of their self-identity. They are now given the kingdom by Jesus
(Revelation 20:4).

During the 1000 years the saints (who are now kings, priests and judges) will participate in the
sentencing of their wicked oppressors. Their judges on earth are now judged in heaven. All the
good deeds of the wicked will be deleted at this time. The wicked at this point do not know that

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 290 of 369
their cases are being examined in heaven because they are dead. They are judged in heaven, in
absentia.

But after the millennium the wicked will be resurrected from the dead. Their own self-identity will
be returned to them at this time minus all the good deeds they performed in their life. They will
then see, in person, the justice of their sentence and with one accord will proclaim the justice and
love of God.

Then, and only then, can God destroy sin and sinners!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 291 of 369
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 292 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #21 – NOTES ON DANIEL 8

Introductory Matters
Daniel 8 is dated to the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar. This would be the year 550 BC
eleven years were still to pass before the fall of Babylon.
Daniel is really composed of two books in one. The first book comprises chapters 1-7 and the
second book is composed of chapters 8-12. It is important to remember that Daniel 8-12 is the
sealed book of Daniel 12:4 as well as the little book of Revelation 10. For additional information
on this point please consult Pastor Bohr’s document, ‘Daniel’s Little Book,’ at the end of this
material.

Daniel 8 follows the same basic sequence of powers as Daniel 7 but there are four significant
differences:
First of all, a lion is used in Daniel 7 to represent Babylon, but in Daniel 8 there is no symbol for
Babylon. Why is this? Different possibilities have been suggested. The first suggestion is that the
existence of Babylon is assumed because the vision is dated to the reign of Belshazzar who was a
Babylonian king. This is a good point. Less enticing is the idea that no symbol for Babylon is
included because Babylon is about to disappear from the prophetic scenario. But the fact is, as
indicated above, that Babylon did not fall until the year 539 BC a full eleven years after this vision
was given. The best explanation for the exclusion of a symbol for Babylon is that the prophecy of
the 2300 days/years began during the period of Persian rule and not during the period of the
Babylonian kingdom.
Secondly, Daniel 7 has four beasts and each of them is wild and carnivorous. Daniel 8 has only
two beasts and each of them is domestic. In fact, the ram was used in the daily service of the
sanctuary and the he-goat was used in the yearly service. This clearly shows that the central
emphasis of Daniel 8 is the sanctuary. We will discover in our study that the little horn takes away
the daily (represented by the ram) and for this, God will judge it in the yearly service (represented
by the he-goat) on the Day of Atonement.
In the third place, in Daniel 7 there are two separate symbols for pagan and papal Rome. Pagan
Rome is represented by a dragon and papal Rome is represented by a little horn which comes up
from the head of the dragon beast. But in Daniel 8 both Pagan and Papal Rome are represented by
the little horn. Why does Daniel 8 represent the two Rome’s with only one symbol? We will find
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 293 of 369
that one reason is that the Holy Spirit, through Daniel, wants us to think in terms of the daily and
yearly services of the sanctuary. If another beast had been introduced, this sanctuary symbolism
would have been blurred.

Another issue we will address later in this study is the reason why the little horn of Daniel 7 arises
from pagan Rome while the little horn of Daniel 8 arises from one of the four Hellenistic kingdoms.
This apparent discrepancy between Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 has led futurist and preterist scholars
to conclude that the little horn of Daniel 8 does not represent the same power as the little horn of
Daniel 7. Preterists believe the little horn in Daniel 7 and 8 is a symbol of Antiochus Epiphanes.
Futurist scholars believe that the little horn of Daniel 7 represents a future individual Antichrist
who will sit in a rebuilt Jerusalem temple for three and a half literal years while they believe that
the little horn of Daniel 8 represents Antiochus Epiphanes.
Finally, the vision of Daniel 7 concludes with the setting up of Christ’s everlasting kingdom. But
in Daniel 8 there is no mention of the everlasting kingdom. Thus the vision of Daniel 8 as compared
with Daniel 7 is incomplete. Why is this? The fact is that Daniel 8-12 is a book in itself and the
central theme of the book is the 2300 days/years. One must wait until the conclusion of the book
for the setting up of the everlasting kingdom (Daniel 12:1-3). That is to say, Daniel 8:14 provides
us with the description of the beginning of the judgment (1844 A. D.) and Daniel 12:1-3 presents
the conclusion of the same judgment and the setting up of the everlasting kingdom. In between
these two points of time we find the date for the beginning of the 2300 days/years (Daniel 9), the
struggle between Christ and Satan for the decrees to be given (Daniel 10), and an amplified outline
of events from the kingdom of Persia till the end of the judgment and the setting up of Christ’s
everlasting kingdom (Daniel 11:1-12:3).

Comments on Verses One and Two

There is a tremendous emphasis in these verses on seeing. Actually, this emphasis is underlined
time and again in verses 1-13. It is of the utmost importance to keep in mind the Hebrew word for
‘vision’ (chazon). We will have occasion to come back to this word which is used three times in
verses one and two and once in verse thirteen. It is also important to recognize that Daniel is in
Persia when he sees this vision. In other words, the vision begins during the kingdom of Persia
even though it is dated to the rule of Belshazzar.

Remarks on Verses Three and Four

Notice once again the emphasis on sight: ‘eyes’, ‘saw’, ‘behold’. Daniel sees a ram next to the
river. The ram has two horns but one is higher than the other and the highest one comes out last.
The meaning of the ram symbol is interpreted in verse 20: ‘The ram which thou sawest having two
horns are the kings of Media and Persia.’ Significantly, after Darius the Mede (died in 536 BC),
Cyrus (who was half Median and half Persian and died in 530 B. C.), and Cambyses (who was
also half Median and half Persian and died in 522 B. C.), all the remaining rulers were Persian.
The tallest horn did come up last!! In Daniel 5 we are told that Babylon fell into the hands of the
Medes and Persians. In Daniel 8 we are informed that the two horns are the kings of Media and
Persia. But after Daniel 8 this kingdom is referred to uniformly only as ‘Persia’ (Daniel 10:1, 13,
20; 11:2) [For more on this, see Stephen Bohr’s, ‘A Dynastic Chart of the Medes and Persians’.]

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 294 of 369
There is a remarkable parallel between the bear of Daniel 7 and this ram. In Daniel 7 the bear is
raised up on one side. In Daniel 8 one of the horns is higher than the other. In Daniel 7 the bear
has three ribs in its mouth and in Daniel 8 the ram conquers in three points of the
compassBwestward (Babylon 539 B. C.), northward (Lydia, 546 B. C.), and southward (Egypt,
525 B. C.)
It is worthy of notice that the ram became ‘great’. We will soon see a power which became ‘very
great’ and still another which became ‘exceedingly great’. It is also important to realize that the
ram conquers only horizontally. In other words, it fights against other ‘beasts’ (kingdoms) on earth
but does not fight vertically against the God of heaven. We will soon see a power in this prophecy
which actually fights against God on a vertical level.

Analysis of Verses Five to Eight

Please examine the following information before we move on to verses 5-8:

Hellenistic Civilization (336 BC till the death of the Roman Empire in 476 AD)

Hellenistic Greece (323-133 BC)

Begins with Alexander the Great (334-323 BC)
Antigonids [Macedonia-Greece] (283-168 BC)
Attalids [Pergamum] (263-133 BC)
Ptolemies [Egypt] (323-30 BC)

Rome’s expansion in the east, south and glorious land

Annexed Macedonia (148 BC)
Annexed Greece (146 BC)
Inherited Pergamum (133 BC)
Conquered the Seleucid Empire (64/63 BC)
Conquered Palestine (63 BC)
Fall of Egypt [the Ptolomies] (63 BC)

Hellenism defined
The process of Hellenization began with the death of Alexander the Great and ended between 146-
133 BC. In reality, however, Roman civilization was in many ways a continuation of Hellenistic
civilization. In the Hellenistic period:
Greek culture was widely extended over Greeks and non-Greek people alike.
City life was reshaped along the lines of the Greek polis—city.
Greek literature became the literature of the learned.
The Greek language became the ordinary medium of commercial and political interchange; the
language of the educated.
Artists and craftsmen took the humanistic Greek masterpieces as models for imitation.
New temples were built and old ones reconstructed on traditional Greek architectural lines.
Young men of the oriental cities flocked to the Greek gymnasia.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 295 of 369
Greek cults were instituted in regions once sacred to oriental gods (this was a time of great religious
syncretism.

The orient was made a captive to Greek culture but in the course of the second century BC the old
oriental influences made their power felt once more forcing themselves into and through the
Hellenistic surface.

In these verses we once again see a marked emphasis on seeing. The he-goat comes from the west.
It is not only geographically true that Greece is west of the kingdom of Persia but it is also true
that Greece is west of Shushan where Daniel saw the vision next to the river Ulai. There is no
doubt that the he-goat of Daniel 8 is parallel to the leopard of Daniel 7. We know this for two
reasons:
1) In Daniel 8 the he-goat is conquering so swiftly that it does not even touch the earth. In other
words, it is a flying goat. In Daniel 7 the leopard (a swift beast in itself) is rendered even swifter
because it has four wings of an eagle.
2) The he-goat of Daniel 8 sprouts four horns and the leopard of Daniel 7 has four heads. As we
compare the leopard of Daniel 7 with the he-goat of Daniel 8 we must conclude that this kingdom
had two main periods of existence. The first was during the reign of the notable horn and the
second was after the notable horn was broken and four came up in its place. If we had only Daniel
7 we might conclude that this was a quadruple kingdom from the start. But Daniel 8 clearly adds
to the picture by showing that the kingdom had one ruler at first and later was divided into four
parts.
What does this he-goat represent? We do not have to guess. The text clearly informs us that ‘the
rough goat is the king of Greece; and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.’
(Daniel 8:21). The first king of the Hellenistic Age was Alexander the Great. His speed of conquest
was notable. In only three years he moved from Athens to the Hindus Valley and conquered
everything in his path. Contrast this with Nebuchadnezzar who took three years to conquer
Jerusalem (588-586B. C.), and with Assyria which also took three years to conquer Samaria (725-
722 B. C.). Greece did run against Medo-Persia ‘in the fury of his power’ (verse 6) and did ‘break
his two horns’ (verse 7). It is significant that Alexander the Great was broken when ‘he was strong’
(verse 8). Kingdoms in antiquity always grew strong, then weakened and finally fell to the enemy.
But Alexander died at the tender age of 33 when he was at the height of his power (for more on
this, read Daniel 11:4). It is said that he intoxicated himself to death by his drinking.
We must now turn to the four horns. In Adventist circles the four horns are commonly interpreted
as Alexander’s four generals: Cassander, Seleucus, Lysimachus and Ptolomy. But this
interpretation has its problems. First of all, the four horns are clearly identified as ‘kingdoms’, not
as ‘kings’ (see Daniel 8:22). Secondly, it is a historical fact that Alexander’s kingdom was not
carved up into four neat kingdoms immediately upon his death. The history of Greece after
Alexander’s death is complex. Sometimes there were three kingdoms. At other times there were
four kingdoms and for a short space just before 280 B. C., there were only two!! [for more on the
checkered history of Greece after Alexander’s death, read, The Four Horns of Daniel 8" included
at the end of this material]. Which, then, are the four kingdoms represented by the four horns?
Secular historian W. W. Tarn identifies them for us:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 296 of 369
“He [Alexander] left no heir, and had made no arrangements for carrying on the government
[notice how this fits precisely with Daniel 8:22 where we are told that the four kingdoms would
‘stand up out of the nation, but not in his power’]. Once the uprisings of Greece in the Lamian
war and of the Greeks in the far east were defeated, a struggle for power started among his
generals in the shape of war between the satraps (territorial dynasts) and whatever central power
aimed at general control; the battle of Ipsus in 301 definitely decided that the Graeco-Macedonian
world could not be held together, and that world presently returned very much to the political
shape it had before Alexander, though under different rulers and a different civilization. By 275
three dynasties, descended from three of his generals, were well established; the Seleucids ruled
much of what had been the Persian Empire in Asia, the Ptolomies ruled Egypt, and the Antigonids
Macedonia. A fourth European dynasty, not connected with Alexander, the Attalids of Pergamum
subsequently grew up in Asia Minor at Seleucid expense, and became great by the favor of Rome.”
(W. W. Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization (New York: Meridian, 1971), p. 6, bold is mine.
It is clear, then, that the four horns represent the Antigonids (283-168 BC) who governed
Macedonia and Greece in the west, the Seleucids (312-63 BC) who ruled Syria and Mesopotamia
in the east, the Ptolomies (323-30 BC) who ruled Egypt in the south, and the Attalids (263-133
BC) who ruled the kingdom of Pergamum in the north. The question still remains: Out of which
of these four kingdoms did the little horn come forth? Before we can answer this question we must
deal with two issues which are very closely related.
The first issue is the following: Seventh-day Adventists, with few exceptions, have always
believed that the little horn of Daniel 7 and the little horn of Daniel 8 represent the same power,
namely, Papal Rome. However, this interpretation presents an apparently insurmountable problem
and it is this: The little horn of Daniel 7 arises from the dragon beast which is a symbol of pagan
Rome. However, the little horn of Daniel 8 rises from one of the four divisions of the Greek empire.
How can the little horn arise both from Greece and from Rome? How can this apparent
discrepancy be resolved? This brings us to the second issue.
Most Adventist authors have attempted to resolve this problem by affirming that the little horn did
not arise from one of the four horns but rather from one of the four winds of heaven. You see, the
expression ‘the four winds of heaven’ is much more indefinite than the expression ‘four horns’. If
the little horn arises from one of the four winds of heaven, it could arise just about anywhere,
including Rome. However, if it arose from one of the four horns, it would have to arise specifically
from one of the four Hellenistic kingdoms. I believe that the attempt to prove that the little horn
came forth from one of the winds and not from one of the horns is well intended but unnecessary
to resolve the problem. What do I mean?
First of all, we must examine the Hebrew text to determine whether the little horn arose from the
winds or from the horns. The text literally reads: ‘Four notable ones [feminine] toward the four
winds [masculine]. And out of one [masculine] of them [feminine] came forth a little horn.’
(Daniel 8:8, 9) The gender of the words in the literal text indicates clearly that the little horn was
to arise from one of the four horns which are at the four winds of heaven. It is not either/or but
rather both/and.
We must also examine 1 Maccabees 1:10, Josephus and the LXX. First from 1 Maccabees 1:8-10:
“Alexander had reigned twelve years when he died. Each of his comrades established himself in
his own region. All assumed crowns after his death, they and their heirs after them for many years,
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 297 of 369
bringing increasing evils on the world. From these grew a sinful offshoot, Antiochus Epiphanes,
son of King Antiochus. . .”
Even though we cannot agree with the author of Maccabees on the identity of the little horn, we
can agree that the evil offshoot came from one of the regions into which the kingdom of Greece
was divided.
Notice the reading in the LXX:
“. . . and four other horns rose up in its place toward the four winds of heaven. And out of one of
them [out of one of the horns at the four winds] came forth one strong horn. . .”
Now notice the words of Josephus:
“. . . he [Daniel] saw a very great horn [Alexander] growing out of the head of the he-goat, and
that when it was broken off, four horns grew up that were exposed to each of the four winds, and
he wrote that out of them arose another lesser horn, which, as he said, waxed great. . . .”
When Josephus speaks of four horns which were exposed to each of the four winds, it is clear that
he means that the kingdom of Alexander was divided into four kingdoms which are to be found at
each of the points of the compass. In other words, the four horns would be four kingdoms, one to
the south, one to the north, one to the east and the other to the west in what used to be Alexander’s
empire. The critical question is: From which of these four kingdoms did the little horn arise?
Before we answer this question we must remember that the little horn is a symbol of both pagan
and papal Rome. As we shall see, this can be proved from the Bible text itself!
In order to comprehend from which kingdom the little horn emerges it will be necessary to provide
some extensive historical background. Let’s begin in Daniel 2.
The story is well is well known. Nebuchadnezzar had a dream and when he woke up he had
forgotten it. So he called the magicians, the astrologers, the sorcerers and the Chaldeans to tell him
the dream and its meaning. These wise men of Babylon were unable to explain what the king
demanded.
It is well known from history that these Babylonian wise men were polytheistic. In fact, they told
the king that only the gods [plural] could give him the information he demanded (Daniel 2:11; see
also, Isaiah 47). The book of Daniel reveals that these wise men hated Daniel and his three friends.
They accused Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah when they refused to worship the image which
Nebuchadnezzar had raised up (see, Daniel 3:8-11). As I have shown when we studied Daniel 3,
the image was a symbol of the Babylonian sun-god, Marduk. Notice the four key elements which
are apropos to our study: 1) Nebuchadnezzar who for seven years behaved as a beast, 2) raised up
an image and 3) gave a decree to worship the image to the beast. 4) Whoever did not worship the
image to the beast was to be killed. These four elements will be picked up again in Revelation 13
where end-time Babylon will repeat the story of Daniel three on a world-wide scale. At this point
I just want us to remember that this episode in Daniel 3 is the first link in the chain which connects
ancient Babylon with end-time Babylon. We will come back to this later. These Babylonian priests
hated Daniel and his friends because they were monotheistic.
When Babylon fell to the Medo-Persian Empire, a new religion was introduced. This religion is
known as Zoroastrianism. It is characterized by its strict monotheism. The basic tenets of this

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 298 of 369
religion are that there is one true Almighty God, whose name is Ahura-Mazda. He is the God of
light. But there is also an arch-adversary of God whose name is Ahriman. He inhabits the realm of
darkness. According to Zoroastrianism, there is a constant battle between the God Ahura-Mazda
and Ahriman (see Humphrey Prideaux, An Historical Connection of the Old and New
Testaments (London: William Tegg and Co., 1858), pp. 149-150.
As we look at ancient history, we find that nations have the almost incurable tendency toward
polytheism. This is made clear in Romans 1:18-32. Even Israel before the Babylonian captivity
had an obsession with foreign gods. It is indeed strange to find a nation in a polytheistic
environment which suddenly propounds monotheism. Other than in the Judeo/Christian and
Muslim traditions, I know of only two other cases. One is in Egypt during the reign of Akenaten
[was it because of what the Hebrew God did to Egyptian civilization at the Exodus?] and the other
is Persia. Why did Persia adopt a strictly monotheistic spirituality?

The answer is not hard to find. Sometime after the fall of Babylon, Daniel had an encounter with
Cyrus, king of Persia. The prophet opened up to Cyrus the prophecies of Isaiah regarding the fall
of Babylon. In fact, Daniel showed Cyrus that God had chosen him by name to deliver His people
one hundred years before his birth (Isaiah 45:1). When Cyrus heard this he was deeply impressed.
Ezra 1:1-3 reveals that Cyrus became a believer in the God of the Hebrews:
“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. . . .3 Who is there among you all his people? His God be with
him, and let him go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and build the house of the Lord God of
Israel (he is the God) which is in Jerusalem.”
Regarding the encounter between Daniel and Cyrus, Ellen White makes the following enlightening
remark:
“As the king saw the words foretelling, more than a hundred years before his birth, the manner in
which Babylon should be taken; as he read the message addressed to him by the Ruler of the
universe . . . his heart was profoundly moved, and he determined to fulfill his divinely appointed
mission.” Ellen G. White, Prophets and Kings, p. 557
There can be no doubt that the Persian Empire came to knowledge of the true God primarily
through the contacts of Darius and Cyrus with Daniel.
Just as a sidelight, I might mention that the wise men who came to visit Jesus were not idolaters.
They were most likely from Persia. Ellen White identifies these wise men from the East as
‘philosophers’. She also states that these magi studied the starry heavens but they did it with the
aid of the Hebrew Scriptures. Regarding this she states:
“Seeking clearer knowledge [than what they could discern by a study of the starry heavens] they
turned to the Hebrew Scriptures. In their own land were treasured prophetic writings that
predicted the coming of a divine teacher.”
Then Ellen White makes a very significant statement:
“Balaam belonged to the magicians, though at one time a prophet of God; by the Holy Spirit he
had foretold the prosperity of Israel and the appearing of the Messiah; and his prophecies had

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 299 of 369
been handed down by tradition from century to century. But in the Old Testament the Savior’s
advent was more clearly revealed.”
Ellen White then goes on to explain the nature of the Star:
“It was not a fixed star nor a planet, and the phenomenon excited the keenest interest. That star
was a distant company of shining angels, but of this the wise men were ignorant. Yet they were
impressed that the star was of special import to them. They consulted priests and philosophers,
and searched the scrolls of the ancient records. Then Ellen White tells us that they found the
prophecy of Numbers 24:7.” Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, pp. 59-60

But even after monotheism took hold in the kingdom, there were still Babylonian priests, of the
Daniel 2 type, in the realm. These were angry that their religion had been overthrown and they
looked for every opportunity to reestablish their lost dominion. Cyrus died in 530 B. C. and was
succeeded by Cambyses who governed for seven and one half years.
Let’s talk a moment about King Cambyses. History tells us that he went on an expedition to Egypt.
When he was in Syria on the way back to Persia, a herald was sent from Shushan who rode into
the midst of the army and proclaimed that Smerdis, the son of Cyrus had been crowned king and
that all must obey him. Now, when Cambyses set out for Egypt he had placed Patizithes to tend to
governmental affairs in his absence. Patizithes had a brother who greatly resembled Smerdis. In
fact, he had the same name. Cambyses was jealous of Cyrus’ son and had him killed. Cambyses
was a lunatic who was always looking over his shoulder suspicious of all and murdering any
potential rival.
For example, Cambyses married his youngest sister because she was very beautiful. But one day
he kicked her in the abdomen and killed her because she cried when she heard that Smerdis had
died. She was pregnant at the time and the baby died also. Cambyses had several faithful followers
buried alive for no reason at all!!
After Smerdis was killed by Cambyses, Patizithes placed his brother on the throne. This Smerdis
look-alike who had the same name became known as false Smerdis. Patizithes then informed
everyone that false Smerdis was the true son of Cyrus. This false Smerdis was a Mede (not a
Persian like Cyrus) and the chief leader of the Babylonian Magi who remained after the conquest
of Babylon by Cyrus. He hated the Jews and gave a decree halting the rebuilding of the Jerusalem
temple at the bequest of the Samaritans. But the imposture was soon discovered. Seven Persians
of the nobility entered the royal palace (the name of the leader was Otanes) and slew false Smerdis
and his brother Patizithes. There was also a great slaughter of the polytheistic Magi of the
Babylonian type who sympathized with false Smerdis. Significantly, the remnant which remained
alive fled to the city of Pergamum in Asia Minor. Darius the Persian then reestablished the holy
temples and monotheistic religion of Ahura-Mazda (for more on this read, Humphrey Prideaux,
An Historical Connection of the Old and New Testaments, volume 1, pp. 145-147, 205-207).
In 480 b. c., another Persian king, Xerxes (the Ahasuerus of the book of Esther), who was a staunch
defender of the monotheistic religion of Persia, destroyed the temples of the Greeks (because he
detested their polytheism) and he also undertook a campaign to Babylon where he destroyed the
pagan temples there as well (see, Humphrey Prideaux, An Historical Connection of the Old And
New Testaments, volume 1, pp. 214-215. Once again the Babylonian Magi fled to Pergamum for

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 300 of 369
refuge. Thus it was that the religion of the Babylonian Magi was established in the city of
Pergamum in Asia Minor.

There is no doubt that the pagan Roman Empire grew out of Asia Minor. We know this for several
reasons. First of all, the Roman poet, Virgil, tells us that Roman civilization and culture came from
the ancient city of Troy in Asia Minor. In his famous epic, The Aenid (which he wrote during a
period of eleven years, 30-19 B. C.), Virgil tells about a Trojan prince who was exiled to Italy in
the 12th century b. c. when Troy was destroyed by the Greeks. According to Virgil, this prince
established the first settlement in Italy.
In the well-known work, The Migration of the Etruscans we are told once again that Roman
civilization and culture grew out of Asia Minor. Says Christopher S. Mackay:

“. . . Roman political and religious practices were strongly influenced by the Etruscans. Early
Roman art and religion were also strongly influenced by the Etruscans, and the Romans seem to
have developed their writing system from them (who borrowed it from the Greeks). Hence, while
the Greeks were a strong cultural influence on early Rome, the Etruscans had a more immediate
influence. Herodotus tells us that before the Trojan War the Etruscans migrated from Lydia (in
western Asia Minor) to Rome as a result of a great drought which lasted for 25 years@.
(Http://www.ualberta.ca/~csmackay/CLASS_365/Etruscans.html)
But not only did Rome borrow its civilization and culture from Asia Minor, they also borrowed
their religion from there. Once again Christopher Mackay states:
“The Etruscans were heavily influenced by Greek art. They adopted many Greek forms, though
they strongly adapted them in spirit. They built temples that were like Greek ones, but differed in
having a front (Greek temples were symmetrical) and having a three-fold interior (division into
three rooms). They were decorated with terra cotta figures. The Romans adopted all these forms.
“The Etruscans were considered a very religious people in antiquity, and the Romans borrowed
many religious customs from them. The traditional Roman form of divination was to observe the
flight of birds (auspicium) but they adopted divination through inspection of livers
(hepatoscopy/haruspicy) and thunder from the Etruscans.”
Mackay further informs us that the Etruscan kings Awore purple robes and sat on a throne called
sella curulis in Latin. All of these symbols were adopted by the magistrates of the Roman Republic,
and presumably reflect the usages of the Roman kings under the Etruscan dynasty.
In 67 AD, the Roman general Pompey went on an expedition to do away with pirates in Asia
Minor. We know that Pompey there adopted the religion of Asia Minor. In fact, Mithraism became
the official religion of the Roman legions. Franz Cumont who spent the better part of a lifetime
studying the religion of the Roman Empire states the following about the phenomenal growth of
Mithraism in Rome:
“All the original rites that characterized the Mithraic cult of the Romans unquestionably go back
to Asiatic origins. . . . The principal agent of its diffusion was undoubtedly the army. The Mithraic
religion is predominantly a religion of soldiers, and it was not without good reason that the name
of milites was given to a certain grade of initiates. . .” (Franz Cumont, The Mysteries of Mithra
(New York: Dover Publications, 1956), pp. 30, 40)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 301 of 369
Significantly, Cumont says that ‘the original home of Mithra was not infrequently placed on the
banks of the Euphrates [Babylon]. . . .’ and then he explains: ‘Very early the Magi had crossed
Mesopotamia and penetrated to the heart of Asia Minor.’ (Franz Cumont, The Mysteries of
Mithra, pp. 10-11)
That is to say, Asia Minor became the link between ancient Babylon and pagan Rome. This is
a pivotal point which we will come back to in a few moments.
According to Cumont:
“It can be proved that all our representations of the tauroctonous Mithra, the hieratic figure of
which was fixed before the propagation of the Mysteries in the Occident, are more or less faithful
replicas of a type created by a sculptor of the school of Pergamum, in imitation of the sacrificing
Victory which adorned the balustrade of the temple of Athena Nike on the Acropolis.” (Franz
Cumont, The Mysteries of Mithra (New York: Dover Publications, 1956), p 210
Furthermore, it is often overlooked that Pergamum was the only one of the four Macedonian
kingdoms which Rome did not have to fight to overcome. The kingdom of Pergamum was willed
to the Roman Senate by king Attalus III in the year 133 B. C. (See, Encyclopedia Britannica,
article, ‘Pergamum’). This not only gave Rome a foothold in Asia Minor from which it could
conquer the nations of the East, but it also became the bridge which made it possible for Rome to
come in contact with God’s covenant people, Israel. In this way, the fulfillment of Daniel 8 was
made possible. The strategic importance of Asia Minor is described by the Turkish Ministry of
Foreign Affairs:
‘The role played by Asia Minor in Western culture was: primarily determined by its geographical
position. Whereas all the Mediterranean peninsulas—Iberian, Italian, Greek—extend from north
to south, Asia Minor, alone stretching from east to west forms a unique bridge. It was this which
caused the civilizations arising in the East in general, and on its territory in particular, to orient
themselves towards the West, by way of the Aegean islands.”
(http://www.ptr.co.nz/turkey;pergamum.htm)
So far we have traced the ‘journey’ of Babylonian idolatrous religion from Babylon to Asia Minor
to pagan Rome. But there is more to this story. Pergamum is also the link between pagan Rome
and papal Rome. And, how is this? In order to answer this question, we must turn to Revelation
two and three where the story of the seven churches is told.
It is generally accepted by Bible students that the seven churches depict seven epochs in the
history of the Christian Church. Regarding this, Ellen G. White affirms:
“The names of the seven churches are symbolic of the church in different periods of the Christian
Era. The number 7 indicates completeness, and is symbolic of the fact that the messages extend to
the end of time, while the symbols used reveal the condition of the church at different periods in
the history of the world.” Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 585.
Ellen White is not alone in this assessment. In a sermon preached by Ray C. Stedman on November
19, 1989, we find the following statement:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 302 of 369
“The entire church age is brought before us in the purview of these letters.” Ray C. Stedman,
‘Smyrna and Pergamum: The Pressured Church and the Compromising Church,’
http://www.pbc.org/dp/stedman/revelation/4191.html.

A careful study of the first three churches—Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum—clearly indicates a

progression from the apostolic church to the compromising church. Ephesus symbolizes the
Apostolic Church. Smyrna is symbolic of the persecuted church during the dominion of pagan
Rome. This is clearly indicated by the constant ‘death language’ used with reference to this church
(see, Revelation 2:8-11). Stedman comments about this period:
“Prophetically viewed, this church [Smyrna] is a picture of the period in history from about 160
A. D. to 320 A. D., the rise of Constantine, the first so-called Christian emperor. The whole period
has been termed the ‘Age of Martyrs’.”
According to Stedman the church of Pergamum represents the period when the church
compromised with the world in the days of Constantine. With respect to this, Stedman remarks:
“Prophetically, this is the period from the accession of Constantine in 320 A. D. to the rise of the
papacy in the 6th century. During that period of time were held the great councils of the church.
But it was also the time of the wedding of the church and the world under Constantine. . .
Constantine was not really a true Christian. He adopted many pagan practices and brought them
into the church where they were accepted. Christianity was popular in those days and many pagan
practices were incorporated into it. This began when the church was viewed as a worldly kingdom,
like any other kingdom.”
Ellen G. White concurs with this interpretation. In The Great Controversy, pp. 49-50 she states:
“The nominal conversion of Constantine in the early part of the fourth century, caused great
rejoicing; and the world, cloaked with a form of righteousness, walked into the church. Now the
work of corruption rapidly progressed. Paganism, while appearing to be vanquished, became the
conqueror. Her spirit controlled the church. Her doctrines, ceremonies, and superstitions were
incorporated into the faith and worship of the professed followers of Christ.”
Let’s take a closer look at the church of Pergamum. We will begin with Revelation 2:13. Here we
are told that Pergamum is the place where Satan’s throne is found. A king sits on a throne so we
must conclude that Pergamum is the ‘See’ of Satan’s kingdom. Before we proceed further with
this thought, we must take a look at another expression in Christ’s message to the church of
Pergamum. We are told that this church holds ‘the doctrine of Balaam’ (Revelation 2:14). What
could this expression possibly mean? To find the answer, we must go back to the original source,
Numbers 22-24.
Numbers 21:10ff informs us that Israel had gained signal victories over their enemies. They had
wiped out the Ammonites and the Moabites were afraid that they were next. For this reason, Balak,
king of the Moabites, attempted to persuade Balaam to curse Israel. But Israel was in a strong
covenant relationship with the Lord at this time and Balaam could not curse them as long as they
remained faithful. (Numbers 22:6, 12, 18; 23:8-10, 20-23; 24:5, 9) [We are reminded that
according to Ellen White, Balaam originally belonged to the group of faithful Magi but he later
sold himself to a group of idolatrous Moabite priests who were experts in the art of divination

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 303 of 369
(Numbers 22:7; 23:23). We find here, very early in the history of Israel, the two types of Magi
which will reappear in Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon and in the kingdom of Medo-Persia].
When Balaam was unsuccessful in cursing Israel, he suggested a demonic plan. Why not get the
Israelite men to commit literal fornication with the daughters of Moab and to celebrate their
idolatrous rites? If he could procure this, God would forsake Israel and they would be an easy prey.
This is exactly what Balaam did according to Numbers 25:1-3 (Revelation 2:14 indicates that this
plan was suggested by Balaam). When Israel forsook the Lord, the Lord withdrew His protection
and Israel lost 24,000 men. Not everyone apostatized, though. Numbers 25:6-8 tells the triumphant
story of how Phinehas exalted God’s honor.
Let us now turn to Revelation 12:1-5, 7-9. The dragon in this passage is symbolic of Rome and
Rome is where Satan’s throne is. And how do we know this? Because in Revelation 13:2 we find
that this dragon (symbolic of Satan working through Rome) gave the beast (the papacy) his power,
and throne and great authority. And where was Satan’s throne at this time? It was symbolically in
Pergamum (Revelation 2:13) Why is all this important?
The message of the apostolic church (Ephesus) spread like grassfire. Satan responded by
persecuting the church (Smyrna). But the more the church was persecuted, the more it grew. So
Satan decided to change his strategy. Not able to destroy the church from outside by persecution,
Satan decided to infiltrate the church. In 313 A. D. persecution ended. Constantine the Great, an
avowed worshiper of the sun-god Mithra proclaimed a decree of toleration. Constantine became a
‘Christian’ and proclaimed the first civil Sunday law, calling it ‘the Venerable Day of the Sun’. In
fact, Constantine had a coin minted with the inscription, Deus Sol Invictus (‘to the invincible sun’).
The entire empire now became ‘Christian’. Regarding this, Ellen White remarks:
“The great adversary now endeavored to gain by artifice what he had failed to secure by force.
Persecution ceased, and in its stead were substituted the dangerous allurements of temporal
prosperity and worldly honor. Idolaters were led to receive part of the Christian faith, while they
rejected other essential truths. . . . Under a cloak of pretended Christianity, Satan was insinuating
himself into the church, to corrupt their faith and turn their minds from the word of truth.@ Ellen
G. White, The Great Controversy, pp. 42, 43.

In this way the church committed spiritual fornication by abandoning Jesus and joining the world.
It is no coincidence that the church of Pergamum is followed by the church of Thyatira which is a
clear depiction of the papal church (see Revelation 2:20-23).
In this way, spiritual Pergamum became the link between pagan Rome and papal Rome. We have
previously seen that papal Rome, though in some ways a separate kingdom, was a continuation of
pagan Rome (see, the document, ‘Why Papal Rome is a Continuation of Pagan Rome’).
Amazingly, we have seen that the literal kingdom of Pergamum was the link between ancient
Babylon and pagan Rome. And spiritual Pergamum also linked pagan Rome to papal Rome. Thus
we discern an unbroken chain between ancient Babylon and papal Rome. But there is more to this
story. The papacy passed on many of its errors to apostate Protestantism, including the observance
of Sunday. Astoundingly, the conflict which took place in the Valley of Dura will once again take
place on a world-wide scale (Revelation 13:11-18). Once again the beast will build an image and
command all to worship it. Whoever refuses to worship will be condemned to death. In the days
of Daniel, the number 666 was hidden in the dimensions of the image and at the end the number

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 304 of 369
of the beast will be 666. The image was a solar symbol and at the end, the world will be
commanded to worship on the Sunday. As in the days of Nebuchadnezzar, God will have a faithful
remnant whom He will deliver from certain death.
In conclusion, in a very real sense, pagan Rome grew out of Pergamum (Daniel 8) and papal Rome
grew out of spiritual Pergamum (Revelation 2:13; Daniel 7:8-9).
As we compare the little horn of Daniel 7 with the little horn of Daniel 8 there can be no doubt
that they both refer to the same power. William Shea has provided eleven parallels between the
little horn of Daniel 7 and the little horn in Daniel 8:
Both are identified with the same symbol: a horn (7:8; 8:9). Remarkably, even though Daniel 7
was written in Aramaic and Daniel 8 in Hebrew, both employ the same word for ‘horn’ (qeren)
Both are described as ‘little’ at the outset (7:8; 8:9)
Both are described as becoming ‘great’ later on (7:20; 8:9ff)
Both are described as persecuting powers (7:21, 25; 8:10, 24)
Both have the same target group as the object of their persecution (7:21, 25, 27; 8:24). Both
chapters call the persecuted ones ‘the people of the saints’ (7:27; 8:24)
Both are described as self-exalting and blasphemous powers (7:8, 11, 20, 25; 8:10-12, 25)
Both are described as exercising a crafty intelligence (7:8: ‘eyes of a man’; 8:23-25: ‘understands
riddles, cunning and deceit’)
Both represent the final and greatest anti-God climax of their visions (7:8-9, 21-22; 25-26; 8:12-
14, 25).
Both have aspects of their work delimited by prophetic time (7:25; 8:14)
The activities of both extend to the time of the end (7:25-26; cf. 12:7-9; 8:17, 19)
Both are to be supernaturally destroyed (7:11, 26; 8:25)

Shea summarizes the evidence:

“If the prophet had desired to represent different powers in this final position, he could easily have
used different symbols to do so. But instead he used the same symbol of a little horn at the end of
the vision in chapter 8 as he did at the end of the vision in chapter 7. This commonality of
representation suggests that the same symbol has been used to refer to the same power in both
cases.” William Shea, Symposium on Daniel, p. 187

It seems that the emphasis of Daniel 7 falls upon giving the orderly sequence of powers from the
day of Daniel until Christ sets up His everlasting kingdom. The emphasis of chapter 8 on the other
hand is to highlight and amplify the origin of Rome in its two stages. Both stages of Rome
originated with Pergamum, both have ruled from the same geographical center and both have
performed many of the same actions (see Revelation 13:2).

Exposition of verse Nine

Several items are important in this verse. Notice, first of all, that the ram ‘waxed great’ (8:4), the
he-goat ‘waxed very great’ (8:8), but the little horn ‘waxed exceeding great’ (8:9). The
expression ‘came forth a little horn’ could be better translated ‘came forth a horn from littleness.’
From small beginnings, the horn was to grow until it reached gigantic proportions. That is to say,
the little horn would become more powerful than the ram or the he-goat. This is simply not true of

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 305 of 369
Antiochus Epiphanes. He was nothing compared to Medo-Persia and the Greece of Alexander the
Great!!
The ram and the he-goat fought each other geographically or horizontally. The first conquests of
the little horn were also geographical. But then, suddenly, this battle changes to the cosmic vertical
plane. In other words, at first, all the conquests are on earth. The controversy is with earthly
powers. Verse 9 is referring to the conquests of the pagan Roman Empire. Rome did indeed
conquer to the south (Egypt), to the east (Greece, Asia Minor, Syria), and to the Glory (a
euphemism for the land of Israel).

Remarks on Verse Ten

The little horn which had been conquering horizontally on earth now began an onslaught vertically
against heaven. The sense of the first part of verse 10 is: ‘the horn grew geographically, yes, even
vertically into heaven.’ The horn grows great, even to the host of heaven and hurls down some of
the host of the stars to the ground and tramples upon them. Whenever the expression ‘grow great’
(gadal) is used in the Old Testament of human beings, without exception, it refers to one who takes
power illegally, presumptuously and arrogantly. In the Old Testament the word ‘host’ is used in
the majority of the cases to describe ‘armies’.
The question is, “What is meant by the ‘host’ or army of heaven?” There are three possibilities:
The hosts or stars of heaven can refer to angels (Nehemiah 9:6; Judges 5:20; Job 38:7;
Revelation 12:7-9; 19:11).

The host or stars is a reference to the literal sun, moon and stars (Deuteronomy 4:19; II Kings
17:16).

The host or the stars represents God’s people on earth (Exodus 7:4; 12:41; I Samuel 17:45;
Revelation 1:20; Daniel 12:2-3).

The explanation at the end of chapter 8 leaves no doubt as to the identity of the host of heaven
upon which the little horn tramples: ‘And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power:
and he shall destroy wonderfully, and shall destroy the mighty and holy people’ (Daniel 8:24).
The explanation portion of the vision of Daniel 8 follows the identical order as the vision itself.
In the vision you have a ram with two horns (verses 3-4), a he-goat with a notable horn which is
broken and succeeded by four horns (verses 5-8). And then the little horn attacks the host (verse
10) and finally the Prince of the host (verse 11). The angel interpreter at the end of the vision
explains that the two-horned ram represents the Medes and Persians (verse 20). He then states that
the he-goat represents Greece and its notable horn its first king (verse 21). Next he informs us that
the four horns represent the divisions of Greece after the death of its first king (verse 22). Finally,
he explains that a king will arise (verse 23) who will ‘destroy the mighty and the holy people’
(verse 24) and stand up against the Prince of princes (verse 25). Even a passing glance at Daniel 8
will indicate that ‘the host and the stars of heaven’ in the vision stands in the same identical spot
as ‘the mighty and holy people’ in the explanation of the vision.
It is clear, then, that the host represents God’s people. In the New Testament, the Apostle Paul
even uses military terminology to describe the armor and the warfare of God’s people against
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 306 of 369
Satan’s kingdom (Ephesians 6:11-18; Romans 13:12-14; II Corinthians 6:7; I Thessalonians
5:8; II Corinthians 10:3-4).
Notice that in the explanation of the vision, the little horn more specifically called ‘the king of the
north.’ The use of the word ‘king’ need not mean that the Antichrist will be a single individual
person. And why is this? In the Bible, the singular word ‘priest’ with the definite article can mean
a succession of priests (see, Numbers 35:25-28 and compare with Hebrews 9:7). Likewise, the
word ‘king’ with the definite article can mean a succession of kings (see, for example, I Samuel
8:11). Even the word ‘man’ with the definite article can mean Christians of all time (II Timothy
3:17). When Jesus said: ‘The Sabbath was made for man,’ (Mark 2:27), He obviously did not
mean that it was made for only one man but rather for mankind. This helps us understand why
Paul called the Antichrist ‘the Man of Sin’ and why the beast has the ‘number of man’ (Revelation
13:18). The singular word, ‘woman’ with the definite article can also refer to the church of all ages
(see, Revelation 12:4, 6, 13, 14-17). So it is clear that the word ‘king’ in Daniel 8 can refer to a
succession of kings in a dynasty.

Comments on Verse Eleven

As if it wasn’t enough to war against the host, the little horn now attacks the Prince of the host,
the ‘daily’ which belongs to the Prince, and the place of the Prince’s sanctuary. First of all, let’s
identify the Prince.
The word ‘Prince’ is used several times in the book of Daniel (10:13, 21; 12:1-3; 8:11, 25; 11:22;
9:25, 26). Who is this person? The only other place in the entire Bible where the specific name
‘Prince of the host’ (sar tsaba) is used is in Joshua 5:13-15. Even a cursory look at this passage
reveals that the Prince of the host is God (compare Exodus 3:14; John 8:58). There can be no
doubt that the Son of Man, Michael, the Angel of the Lord, the Angel of His Presence, all refer to
the same being (Jude 9; Revelation 12:7-9; I Thessalonians 4:16). It is of more than passing
interest to realize that the high priest in the Old Testament was occasionally called ‘prince’ (see I
Chronicles 24:5; Ezra 8:24, 29)
Notice that the Prince is the Prince of the host. If the host is composed of the saints of the Most
High, then the Prince of the host must be the Commander of those saints. And, who is the
Commander of God’s people on earth? Jesus is the Head of the church. The church receives its
marching orders from Him. Notice that those who belong to God’s people are called ‘saints’ in
both Testaments (Daniel 7:25; Psalm 30:4; 149:1; Ephesians 1:1; Philippians 1:1; Colossians
1:2; Jude 3, etc.).
Let’s talk now about the ‘daily’ (tamid). What does this strange word mean? There is presently an
intense debate about the meaning of this word. Some think it refers to paganism which was taken
out of the way in order to give way to the papacy. Others believe that it refers to the removal by
the papacy of the continual ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary.
The problem in this verse is that the word ‘daily’ is an adjective which stands alone and has no
noun to qualify. The question which begs to be answered is the following: The little horn takes
away the daily what? The meaning of the word is simply ‘something which goes on continuously
without interruption.’ But what is it that ‘goes on continuously without interruption’? It is
important to keep in mind that this word is accompanied by the definite article. It is THE daily
(hatamid) which the little horn takes away (see also Daniel 11:31; 12:11). The King James
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 307 of 369
Version adds the word ‘sacrifice,’ thinking that tamid refers to the morning and evening sacrifice.
But this is a wrong assumption. There is a Hebrew expression for this sacrifice, it is olat tamid.
What, then, does this word mean? Let’s take a closer look (at this point, study the material by
Pastor Stephen P. Bohr, ‘What is the Daily that the Little Horn Took Away?’). The Old Testament
makes it abundantly clear that this word refers to the daily ministration of the priest in the court
and in the holy place of the sanctuary. In other words, the little horn was going to attempt to
take away from the Prince of the host His ministration in the court and in the holy place of the
sanctuary. Never is this word used to describe the most holy place ministry.
In order to comprehend how the little horn did this, we need to answer two fundamental questions:
1) In which sanctuary is the Prince ministering at this point in the vision?
2) What do each of the pieces of furniture in the court and in the holy place represent? In other
words, what was the meaning of the altar of sacrifice, the candlestick, the table of showbread and
the altar of incense? If we are able to determine the answer to these questions, then we will know
also what the little horn attempted to take away from the Prince and when.

Let’s answer the first question. There can be no doubt that in this vision the Prince is ministering
in the heavenly sanctuary. We have identified the Prince as Jesus. And where does Jesus minister
today? We are told in Matthew 21:12-13 that at the end of the Triumphal Entry Jesus entered the
temple of God and called it My Father’s house. However, just a few days later Jesus announced
to the Jewish leaders: ‘Your house is left unto you desolate.’ (Matthew 23:38) The Jerusalem
Temple was no longer the Father’s house nor the temple of God because it had been forsaken by
the presence of Jesus. This is what the rending of veil meant. The system of earthly types and
shadows had come to an end (Matthew 27:51). In A. D. 70 the Jerusalem Temple was destroyed
(Luke 19:41-44) and has never been rebuilt. For this reason alone, it is impossible to conclude that
the sanctuary which the little horn trampled upon was the Jerusalem Temple. During the Christian
dispensation when the little horn did its work, there was no earthly Jerusalem Temple in existence!!
The question suggests itself: If the little horn did not trample upon the earthly Jerusalem Temple,
then which one? The answer is two-fold. Upon His ascension, Jesus began His ministry as High
Priest in the literal heavenly sanctuary physically (Hebrews 8:1-2). He is the High Priest who
ministers in the literal heavenly temple on the heavenly Mt. Zion in the literal heavenly Jerusalem.
He is the minister of a better covenant because He presents before His Father His own better blood.
He is the living Shekinah in the heavenly temple.
But there is more. He is also the minister of the spiritual temple on earth and that spiritual temple
is the Church. This spiritual temple has spiritual foundations, a spiritual Cornerstone, spiritual
stones and a spiritual Shekinah (the Holy Spirit) which entered it on the Day of Pentecost (see,
Ephesians 2:20-22; I Peter 2:1-10; I Corinthians 3:16-17; II Corinthians 6:14-18; II
Thessalonians 2:3-4). In other words, Jesus ministers in two places at the same time: Physically
in heaven and spiritually on earth through the ministry of the Holy Spirit. His heavenly hosts are
the angels and His earthly hosts are His faithful followers.
So then, what is meant by the little horn taking away the ‘daily’ from the Prince and killing His
hosts? It cannot mean that the little horn literally and personally traveled to heaven and deposed
the Prince and destroyed the angels. This idea would be preposterous. What, then, does it mean?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 308 of 369
The answer is found in Daniel 8:11 where we are told that the little horn cast down the place of
the Prince’s sanctuary. We have already shown that the place of the Prince’s sanctuary is in the
literal heavenly Temple and in His church on earth.
The word ‘place’ (makon) here is unusual. There are some very common Hebrew words for ‘place’
in the Old Testament but this is not one of them. The word makon is used only 17 times in the
Hebrew Bible and in 16 of those references the word denotes the heavenly sanctuary as God’s
dwelling place (Exodus 15:17). Perhaps it would be a good idea to look at a few of those
references. In I Kings 8:39, 41, 43, 49 (and parallel passages in II Chronicles 6:30, 33, 39; study
also Psalm 89:14; 97:2 where makon is translated, ‘habitation’) we are informed that God hears
our prayers, forgives our sins, saves us and metes out justice from His heavenly place (makon).

Interestingly, the prayers of God’s people are uttered toward or in the earthly temple but they are
heard by God in heaven. Solomon prayed to the Lord upon the dedication of the Temple:
‘Hear the plea of your servant and of your people Israel when they pray toward this place: O hear
in heaven your dwelling place, hear and forgive.’ (I Kings 8:30; see also Daniel 6:10)
Thus there is an intimate connection between the earthly and heavenly temples. In a sense, God
dwells in both!! For our purposes here, it is important to remember that when Nebuchadnezzar
came and destroyed the Jerusalem Temple, he was not able to touch the heavenly temple!! In the
same way, the little horn is able to take over the functions of the Prince and kill His hosts on earth
but it is not able to usurp from the heavenly Prince his functions in heaven nor destroy His angels.
The act of casting down the place of the Prince’s sanctuary does not mean that the little horn is
demolishing the mortar and stones of the heavenly sanctuary. What it does mean is that the little
horn usurps on earth the daily ministration of the heavenly Prince. What belongs to the Prince in
heaven, the little horn usurps and sets up on earth. The place of the sanctuary is removed from
heaven and set up on earth. The central issue in this whole matter is: Who will control the
sanctuary service in the court and in the holy place [significantly, at this point in the flow of church
history, the little horn only tries to interfere with the ministry of the Prince in the court and in the
holy place. This is understandable in that during the Middle Ages Jesus had not yet entered the
most holy place] the Prince or the little horn? And why is control of the sanctuary such a vital
issue?
At this point we must return to our second question above: What was the meaning of the
ministration of the priest at the altar of sacrifice, the candlestick, the table of showbread and the
altar of incense? Let us examine each of these separately.

The Altar of Sacrifice

Morning and evening a lamb was offered upon this altar for the sins of Israel. As long as the
Hebrew sanctuary and temple stood, there was never a time when the fire was not burning. This
was the daily burnt offering (Exodus 29:39). The sacrifice of the lamb, of course, represented the
death of Jesus Christ on the cross (John 1:29; I Peter 1:19; Revelation 13:8). The fact that the
sacrifice was offered daily, morning and evening, indicates that Jesus died once and for all and
never needs to die again! The benefits of His one and only sacrifice is brought out clearly in
Hebrews 7:27 where the old Hebrew system is contrasted with the ministry of Christ: ‘Who needeth
not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s:
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 309 of 369
for this he did once when he offered up himself.’ And again in Hebrews 9:25-28: ‘Not yet that he
should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with the blood
of others; 26 for then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once
in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And as it is
appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: 28 So Christ was once offered to bear
the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto
salvation.’
The teaching of the once-for-all death of Jesus is counterfeited in the Roman Catholic sacrifice of
the mass. In the mass the once-for-all sacrifice of Jesus is repeated over and over again. Instead of
looking to the Lamb of God in heaven, Roman Catholic believers are taught to look at the wafer
host where the body of Jesus in its totality (ubiquity) is supposedly found. Instead of coming boldly
to Jesus at the throne of grace in heaven believers are taught that they are being nourished by
feeding on the literal body of Jesus on earth. In fact, the host is stored in a flower-like artifact
called the Tabernacle. At the center of the artifact is the round wafer-like host and coming forth
from the host are the rays of the sun. When the tabernacle is brought forth before the congregation,
the faithful are taught to bow and worship the host. This is simply a refined system of sun-worship.
Furthermore, the Roman Catholic priest on earth takes over the power and prerogatives of Jesus
when he pronounces the words of consecration hoc est corpus meum. Roman Catholic theology
teaches that when these words are pronounced, the earthly priest has the power to transubstantiate
the wafer into the real body of Jesus. In other words, the earthly priest has the power to create the
Creator!! This is blasphemy to the fullest degree.

The Table of Showbread

The table of the showbread contained two stacks of unleavened bread each with six loaves. In other
words, there were twelve loaves of bread. By this, God wanted to teach that there was sufficient
bread to feed each and every one of the twelve tribes of Israel. This bread was called (Numbers
4:7) the ‘continual bread’ (tamid) because it was available continually to satisfy the spiritual needs
of Israel.
What did this bread represent? In the Bible, bread is consistently used as a symbol of the Word of
God. In Isaiah 55:10-11 we are told:
“For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither; but watereth
the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the
eater: 11 So shall my word be that goeth foth out of my mouth; it shall not return unto me void, but
is shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.”
When Jesus was tempted by the devil to change stones into bread, He replied: ‘Man shall not live
by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.’ (Matthew 4:4; see
also Deuteronomy 8:3-4).
After Jesus fed 5000 men with only five loaves of bread and two fishes He made a very
controversial remark: ‘Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no
life in you’ (John 6:53). Was Jesus teaching that we are to eat his literal flesh and drink His literal
blood like Roman Catholic theology teaches? Absolutely not! Notice how Jesus explained His own
controversial remark: ‘It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 310 of 369
speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life’ (John 6:63). That is to say, the words of Jesus
have power to nourish the spiritual life. As literal bread sustains physical life, the Word of God
sustains spiritual life. Spiritually speaking, when we study the Word we assimilate Jesus and he
becomes flesh of our flesh and bone of our bones.
It is the ingrafted Word of God which cleanses our life and gives us the victory over sin. David
understood this when he exclaimed: ‘Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? By taking
heed thereto according to thy word . . . Thy word have I hid in mine heart that I might not sin
against thee’ (Psalm 119:9, 11).
Jesus agreed with David when He said to His disciples: ‘Now ye are clean through the word which
I have spoken unto you’ (John 15:3). And the apostle Paul adds his testimony when he states that
the church is sanctified and cleansed ‘with the washing of the water by the word’ (Ephesians 5:26)
What have we discovered so far about the showbread? First of all, it represents Jesus as He is
contained in the written Word of God. Secondly, it is continually available to all of God’s people.
And thirdly, if assimilated, it will nourish the life spiritually and provide victory over sin.
In what sense, then, did the little horn cast down the meaning of the table of the showbread? The
answer is easy to find. Roman Catholicism substituted the traditions of men in place of the Word
of God. The word of a supposedly infallible magisterium was placed above a ‘thus saith the Lord’.
The number of unbiblical (or shall we say, anti-biblical?) traditions is legion: Purgatory, limbo,
celibacy, auricular confession, an eternally burning hell, lent, processions, the mass, relics,
canonization of saints, the rosary, bowing before images, the immaculate conception, the
assumption of Mary, baptism of infants by aspersion, novenas, the observance of Sunday, etc. And
what was the end result of these traditions replacing the Word of God? Spiritual malnutrition and
a moral laxity which would make the pagan Romans look like saints!
It is no coincidence that the third and fourth seals of Revelation describe this period as one of
famine for the Word of God (see, Revelation 6:5-8). In effect, the third horse (the period of
Constantine) brings in the unbiblical teachings and practices of the pagans and the result under the
fourth horse (the 1260 years of papal dominion) is a life threatening scarcity of breadBfamine!!
This is also the period of the fourth church of Revelation. Under this church, Jezebel the harlot is
in control. During this period of 1260 years there is no dew or rain and as a result there is famine
for the word of God. (Revelation 2:20; 11:3, 6; 12:6, 14; cf. Amos 8:11-12)

The Candlestick
Leviticus 24:1-4 explains that one of the tasks of the High Priest was to trim the wicks and
replenish the oil in the seven-branched candlestick of the holy place. In this way he would make
sure that the light of the candlestick burned continually (tamid).

What was represented by the candlestick? Let’s interpret the symbols. Seven represents totality
and oil represents the Holy Spirit. But, what does the candlestick itself represent? Revelation 1
gives us the clear answer. The seven-branched candlestick represents seven stages in the history
of the Christian church from the days of the apostles till the end of time. At times, it looked like
the light of the church was about to be extinguished. Particularly during the period of Thyatira the
light burned dim. This is why the period of papal oppression is known as the ‘dark ages.’

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 311 of 369
The Golden Altar of Incense

The incense which was offered upon this altar was called the ‘perpetual (tamid) incense’ because
it was to be burned on the altar morning and evening continually. What did the incense represent?
The incense upon the altar is connected with the prayers of the congregation. For example, in
Luke 1:9-11 we are told that when Zacharias went into the temple to offer incense, the people were
praying to God outside the holy place. In Psalm 141:2 David exclaims: ‘Let my prayer be set forth
before thee as incense. . .’ Even more explicitly, Revelation 8:3-4 explains the meaning of this
altar:
‘And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto
him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which
was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints,
ascended up before God out of the angel’s hand.”
It appears from this passage that the incense represents the merits of Jesus which are mixed with
the prayers of God’s people. In other words, the incense which was placed upon the golden altar
represents the prayers of God’s people which are mingled with the precious merits of Christ’s
blood and therefore are acceptable before the Father.
It is no coincidence that directly in back of the altar was the veil which divided the holy from the
most holy and behind the veil stood the ark of covenant, a symbol of the throne of God. When
incense was offered on the golden altar, the smoke ascended up the curtain and entered the
presence of God beyond the veil. This is why there were angels embroidered upon the curtain. The
angels take our prayers to Jesus and by the merits of Jesus those prayers enter the very presence
of God. This is the meaning of the ladder which Jacob saw in his dream (see, Genesis 28:11-12
and John 1:51).
In what sense did the little horn take away this function from the Prince? Roman Catholicism has
established a counterfeit priesthood to whom the faithful confess their sins. That is to say, instead
of people directing their prayers to Jesus in heaven for forgiveness, they utter them to a human
priest on earth who cannot forgive. In this way, the intercessory ministry of Jesus is cast down
from heaven and placed on earth!! Furthermore, the faithful in Roman Catholicism offer their
petitions to Mary and the saints instead of to Jesus. In consequence, the eyes of people are taken
off of Jesus who can truly hear their petitions and forgive their sins.

The Bible is crystal clear that there is ‘one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus’
(I Timothy 2:5). Jesus tells us: ‘I am the way, the truth and the life, no man cometh unto the father
but by me’ (John 14:6). In Romans 8:34 the apostle Paul explains that it is Jesus who ‘makes
intercession for us.’ And in words which are impossible to misunderstand, the book of Hebrews
explicitly tells that Jesus ‘is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him,
seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them’ (Hebrews 7:25).
Why do we need mere human intermediaries when we can come boldly to the throne of grace
through Jesus, the God-Man? The confessional in Roman Catholicism focuses the attention of
people upon a man on earth instead of directing them to Christ in heaven.
Summarizing, then, there are two princes that are struggling for the souls of human beings. One of
them performs a continual ministry of salvation in the heavenly sanctuary by pleading the blood
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 312 of 369
of His one and only sacrifice before the Father (the altar of sacrifice). He feeds His people with
the Word of God (the table of showbread), keeps the light of the church burning by the power of
the Holy Spirit (the candlestick) and forgives those who come to Him in penitence and prayer (the
golden altar of incense).
The other prince, unable to usurp the heavenly ministry of the Prince, establishes a counterfeit
continual ministry (the mass, tradition, the confessional, the pope) in the earthly temple—the
church (see II Thessalonians 2:3-4). By getting people on earth to focus on his counterfeit
ministry, he casts down the place of the sanctuary and deprives human beings from discerning the
saving work of Christ! Without being able to discern the saving work of Christ, souls perish in sin!

Remarks on Verse Twelve

We previously found that the Prince has his host. Now we discover that the little horn is also given
a host to war against the daily. So the battle is between the Prince and His host and the little horn
and his host. A comparison of verse 12 with Daniel 11:31 clearly indicates that the little horn’s
host is composed of his armies, the secular power. Notice that the little horn’s host helps fight
against the daily by reason of transgression. The word ‘transgression’ (pesa) is the strongest in the
Old Testament for sin. It really means ‘rebellion’ or ‘revolt’. The little horn and his host are not
simply sinning; they are revolting or openly rebelling against the Prince, the daily and the place of
the sanctuary. The little horn in Daniel 7:25, the king of the north in Daniel 11:36 and the man of
sin of 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 all manifest the same attitude: open and willful rebellion against the
Prince, the daily and the place of the sanctuary.
Amazingly, in all these passages we are told that the little horn and his host prosper in their
endeavor, at least for a while. Daniel 7:21 tells us that the little horn ‘made war with the saints,
and prevailed against them.’ Daniel 11:36 informs us that the king of the north ‘shall do according
to his will.’ And II Thessalonians 2:3-4 is followed by a description of an extended period when
the man of sin and the mystery of iniquity do their doleful work.

This same idea is found in the book of Revelation where the saints are mowed down by Babylon
and they cry out for justice (Revelation 6:9-11). Eventually their pleas will be answered
(Revelation 19:2-3; 11:1-2, 18; 15:1; 22:11) but there is a period during which Babylon prevails
over them. In other words, for a period, the little horn and his host gain the ascendency over the
Prince and His host. This is what necessitates the judgment. The purpose of the judgment in this
specific context is to reverse the little horn’s work. This is really the culmination of what began
when Cain killed Abel—the blood of Abel cried out for justice (Genesis 4:10). The judgment will
vindicate God’s faithful martyrs who have been mowed down in the course of history by those
who claimed to be followers of God! In a few moments we will come back to this theme.

Exposition of Verses Thirteen and Fourteen

Now the video portion of the vision suddenly goes blank but the audio portion continues. Daniel
hears two heavenly beings speaking to each other. One of them asks the other: ‘How long shall be
the vision. . . .’ A better translation would be: ‘Until when shall be the vision. . .’ The difference
between these two translations is subtle but important. The proper emphasis is on when the vision
ends, not on how long it lasts. In other words, it is the termination of the vision which is in view,
not its duration. This can clearly be seen when we compare the question with the answer. ‘Until

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 313 of 369
when?’ asks one angel. The other answers: ‘Until two thousand and three hundred days; then shall
be sanctuary by cleansed.’ The word ‘then’ clearly refers to the termination point.
It is most important to realize that up to this point in Daniel 8 the word for ‘vision’ has uniformly
been the Hebrew word chazon. In fact, everything Daniel has seen up to this point is part of the
chazon (the word is used 3 times in verses one and two). Thus, the vision (chazon) includes Medo-
Persia, Greece, pagan Rome and papal Rome.
The King James Version of Daniel 8:13 reads as follows:
“How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation,
to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?”
This reading leaves one with the impression that the vision includes only the portion that has to
do with the removal of the daily, the transgression of desolation and the trampling of the sanctuary
and the host. Actually the King James translation is wrong on two counts. The original Hebrew
text does not contain the word ‘concerning’ nor does it contain the word ‘sacrifice’. The Hebrew
literally reads:
“Until when the vision [chazon], the daily [tahmid], and the rebellion that causes desolation to
give both the sanctuary and the host a trampling?
Thus when the angel asks the question: ‘Until when shall be the vision (chazon). . .’ he is not
merely referring to the portion of the vision that describes the work of the little horn but rather to
the total vision which began in verse 1.
This proves that we must apply the year/day principle to the 2300 days. Two thousand three
hundred literal days would cover a period of about six and one half years, a time span far too short
to include the kingdoms of Medo-Persia, Greece, pagan and papal Rome. Thus the use of the word
chazon in the angelic question requires that the 2300 days be understood as years!!
The use of the word chazon in the angel’s question also helps us understand why the vision of
Daniel 8 (contra Daniel 7) begins with the kingdom of Medo-Persia and not with the kingdom of
Babylon. The reason is simple: The prophecy of the 2300 days begins during the period of the
Medo-Persian Empire (457 b. c.) and not during the reign of Babylon. If Daniel had started the
chazon with Babylon, he would have given the distinct impression that the prophecy of the 2300
days was to begin during the reign of Babylon!! Thus the vision begins with Medo-Persia because
the 2300 days/years begin during the reign of Medo-Persia (see the chart at the end of this
material).
Daniel 8:14 constitutes the climax of the vision and immediately precedes the angelic explanation.
There are several key considerations which must be taken into account as we analyze this all-
important verse.
First of all, it has been suggested that the 2300 days should really be understood as 1150 days. And
how is this? Liberal scholars who see the little horn as a symbol for Antiochus Epiphanes offer the
following convoluted interpretation: The 2300 evenings and mornings are really referring to 2300
evening and morning sacrifices.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 314 of 369
If this idea were true, the end result would be: 1150 days x 2 sacrifices per day (morning and
evening) = 2300 sacrifices! The reason why liberal scholars offer this novel interpretation is
because they think they can make 1150 literal days fit much better with their Antiochus Epiphanes
interpretation.
Three main considerations make this interpretation unacceptable:
1) The expression in Daniel 8 is not ‘evening and morning sacrifices’. The translation ‘daily
sacrifice’ for the word tamid is an unacceptable reading. There is a Hebrew expression for ‘daily
sacrifice’ (olat tamid) but this is not the expression used in Daniel 8 (see Exodus 29:38-42)
2) The daily sacrifices were not called ‘evening and morning’ sacrifices but, rather, ‘morning and
evening sacrifices’ (Exodus 29:39). There is no exception to this order of words!
3) The Hebrew of Daniel 8:14 literally reads: ‘Until evening-morning twenty three hundred. . .’
This precise order and terminology is used in Genesis one where, after each of the first six days of
creation, we are told ‘it was the evening and morning of the first day, second day, third day’, etc.
Here evening-morning is in the singular which is a clear indication that we are dealing with single
unit composed of an evening and a morning. You cannot reduce the six days of creation to three
any more than you can reduce the 2300 days to 1150!!
Which sanctuary is being spoken of here? The word ‘sanctuary’ is used twice in verses 1-13 (8:11,
13). We have already shown that in these first two references the little horn interfered with the
ministry of Christ in the court and in the holy place. Therefore, there cannot be any doubt,
contextually, that the same sanctuary is being spoken of here. However, there is an important
terminological nuance which is missed in the English translation. In the first two references to the
sanctuary the Hebrew word miqdas is used. But in Daniel 8:14 the word for ‘sanctuary’ is suddenly
changed. Instead of miqdas the word qodes is used. Why the sudden and unexpected shift in terms?
The change must be intentional or else, why would the word be changed? Could this mean that
Daniel is now going to deal with a different apartment of the sanctuary, namely the most holy
place? I believe the answer to this question is a definite yes! It is of more than passing significance
that the word for ‘sanctuary’ in Leviticus 16 is qodes, not miqdas. This is a clear indication that
the angel wishes to connect Daniel 8 with Leviticus 16. In both Daniel 8 and Leviticus 16 it is the
sanctuary which is in view, not the individual believer. We shall see, though, that the individual
believer is indirectly involved in the work of the Day of Atonement.
Another extremely important nuance which is glossed over in the English translation is a change
in the word ‘vision’. In verses 1-15 Daniel has uniformly used the word chazon for ‘vision’ (once
in verse 1, twice in verse 2, once in verse 13, once in verse 15). But when Gabriel is commanded
to explain the vision to Daniel, the word mareh is used. The impact of this change can be seen
more clearly by placing the question about the vision and the command to explain it together:
‘Until when shall be the chazon . . . I, Daniel had seen the chazon. . . . Gabriel, make this man
understand the mareh.”
Why is the Hebrew word ‘vision’ suddenly changed in verse 16? Surely there must be a good
reason, and there is!
A careful examination of the occurrence of the words chazon and mareh in Daniel 8-12 clearly
reveals that while chazon refers to the total vision from Medo-Persia till the cleansing of the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 315 of 369
sanctuary, mareh refers in a narrower sense to the question the angel asked about when the vision
would come to an end. The chazon has to do with the totality of the vision of Daniel 8 while the
mareh has to do with the apparition of the two heavenly beings and the audition which follows.
That is to say, the word mareh has to do directly with the time element of the chazon. For those
who wish to study this further, we will now provide a list of all the occurrences of chazon and
mareh in Daniel 8-12:

Chazon
Daniel 8:1: “a vision appeared to me”
Daniel 8:2: “I saw in the vision. . . I saw in the vision”
Daniel 8:13: “How long will the vision be”
Daniel 8:15: “had seen the vision”
Daniel 8:17: “the vision refers to the time of the end”
Daniel 8:26: “therefore seal up the vision”
Daniel 9:21: “whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning”
Daniel 9:24: “to seal up vision”
Daniel 10:14: “for the vision refers to many days yet to come”
Daniel 11:14: “in fulfillment of the vision”

Mareh

Daniel 8:16: “make this man understand the vision”

Daniel 8:26: “the vision of the evenings and mornings”
Daniel 8:27: “astonished at the vision, but no one understood it”
Daniel 9:23: “and understand the vision”
Daniel 10:1: “had understanding of the vision”
Daniel 10:6: “his face was like the appearance of lightning”
Daniel 10:18: “having the likeness of a man”
Of special significance is the reference to mareh in 8:26. There mareh is clearly linked with the
evening and morning aspect of the 2300-day prophecy. It is clear that the mareh has to do
specifically with the time factor of the chazon. We will find later in our study that while the chazon
was explained in Daniel 8, the mareh was left unexplained. This made it necessary for the angel
to return in Daniel 9 to elucidate the time portion which was not clear to Daniel.

We must now dedicate some time to a translation problem in Daniel 8:14. The King James Version
translates: ‘the sanctuary shall be cleansed’. Desmond Ford, among others, has protested that the
word ‘cleansed’ is a mistranslation in the KJV. In fact, most modern translations avoid the use of
the word ‘cleansed’ (even though the Geneva Bible, the Bishop’s Bible, the Great Bible, Tyndale’s
Bible, Wycliffe’s Bible, the Coptic version, the Syriac version, the Latin Vulgate all have the
translation ‘cleansed’). Instead they employ translations such as ‘shall be justified,’ ‘shall emerge
victorious,’ ‘shall be vindicated,’ and ‘shall be restored to its rightful state’. What is the proper
translation? On the surface, Desmond Ford appears to have a point. The word ‘cleansed’ does not
appear in the Hebrew but is based rather on the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old
Testament) which uses katharizo (whose basic meaning is to ‘cleanse’ or ‘purge’. Incidentally,
this is where we get the word ‘catharsis’ from). Thus the King James Version translation is based

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 316 of 369
on another translation and not on the original Hebrew. What, then, is the Hebrew word in Daniel
8:14?
The original (though we do not have the autograph) Hebrew verb is sadaq in its passive form. And
what is the meaning of sadaq? Let’s take a look. The Hebrew root sdq is used some 500 times in
the Old Testament. Of those 500 uses, 41 are verbal forms. Twenty-two of those verbs are in the
active voice and only one is in the passive voice, the one we are analyzing. According to the
Hebrew lexicons, the word sadaq means ‘to be justified,’ ‘to be vindicated from wrongs,’ ‘to be
brought back to its rights.’ It is not a word which is connected with the ritual of the sanctuary but
rather is a legal term used in the context of a court of law. Its basic emphasis is on the vindication
of an innocent party who has been falsely accused. The vindication process is performed in a court
of law where the judge employs all the powers at his disposal to make sure that the injured party
is vindicated. We will provide only one example from Deuteronomy 25:1:
“If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge
them; then they shall justify (sadaq) the righteous, and condemn the wicked.”

In this context it is interesting to note that the Psalmist envied the wicked until he went into the
sanctuary and saw their final end (Psalm 73:3 17) This seems to indicate that the sanctuary is not
only the means of salvation for the righteous but is a source of condemnation for the wicked.
So it appears that the best translation would indeed be ‘vindicated’ or ‘justified’ rather than
‘cleansed’. But sometimes appearances can be deceiving and we must beware of jumping to hasty
conclusions before a thorough study has been undertaken. This we must now do.
Before we explain why the translation ‘cleansed’ is a good one, we need to mention another
problem. The Seventh-day Adventist pioneers were very much convinced that Daniel 8:14 needed
to be linked with Leviticus 16. They did this by connecting the word ‘cleansed’ in Daniel 8:14
with the word ‘cleanse’ in Leviticus 16. The problem with this procedure is that the Hebrew word
in Daniel is sadaq while the word in Leviticus is taher. (Even worse, as we have seen, the King
James Version is not even based on the Hebrew but on the Greek Septuagint.) The words in
Hebrew are simply different. Sadaq is a legal term whose basic meaning is ‘to vindicate’ and taher
is a ritual term whose basic meaning is ‘to cleanse’. How do we solve this apparent impasse? The
answer is that we must understand the historical period in which Daniel was written.
Before the Babylonian captivity (605-536 B. C.), the Israelites employed Hebrew as their written
and spoken language. But those who were taken captive to Babylon soon adopted Aramaic as their
spoken and written language (to use an analogy, Aramaic is similar to Hebrew like Spanish is
similar to Portuguese today). Daniel E. Augsburger in an unpublished master’s thesis (‘The Good
News of Daniel 8:14", Andrews University, 1980) refers to a scholarly article by Frank
Zimmerman (‘The Aramaic Original of Daniel 8-12,’ Journal of Biblical Literature 57
(September 1938): 255-272) and remarks about the custom of the post-exilic rabbis:
“It is important to note . . . that certain words used in the Hebrew Bible regarding particular
events and places would be changed to another word in Aramaic, even though the original Hebrew
word also existed in Aramaic. Likewise, some of these new Aramaic ‘synonyms’ would have
multiple meanings, which when translated back into Hebrew or Greek, would be written with new
words”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 317 of 369
Augsburger makes a significant point. The post-exilic Jews, having lost to a great degree the use
of Hebrew as their lingua franca, needed the rabbis to provide them with an Aramaic interpretation
they could understand. This the rabbis did by composing the targums which were Aramaic
translations and explanations of the Hebrew text. It is to these targums which Augsburger is
making reference above. We must also remember that the Greek translation of the Old Testament
(the Septuagint or LXX) was prepared in an environment where Aramaic had become the language
of the people. Thus there can be no doubt that Aramaic had a profound influence on the translators
of the Septuagint.
Why have we dedicated so much space to this issue of the historical context? Simply because it
has a powerful bearing on the issue we are dealing with. You see, both the Aramaic targums and
the LXX frequently translate the Hebrew word sadaq, not with a word which means ‘to justify’ or
‘to vindicate,’ but rather with an Aramaic or Greek word with the basic meaning of ‘cleanse’ or
‘purify’. W. E. Read (‘Further Observations on SADAQ.’ Andrews University Seminary Studies
4 [1966]: 29-36) has shown that in the Aramaic Targums the Hebrew word sadaq is changed 40%
of the time to the word zakah (which means ‘cleanse’ or ‘purify’). More significantly, he found
that in 35 of the 38 verbal uses of the word sadaq the rabbis substituted the word zakah in place
of sadaq. And to top it all off, Read discovered that when the word sadaq is used in the context of
the sanctuary, in 100% of the cases, the rabbis supplied the word zakah in the places where the
Hebrew had sadaq!

By way of examples we can provide the following: In Genesis 6:9 we are told that Noah was a
sadaq (‘just’) man but the Aramaic Targum tells us that Noah was a zakah (‘pure’) man. In Job
40:8 the Hebrew word sadaq is once again translated zakah in the Targum. The same happens in
Jeremiah 12:1. These examples and others show clearly that in the minds of the rabbis, sadaq and
zakah were cognate terms. The question is: Are we to trust the rabbis who lived in the Aramaic
period for the proper meaning of words or should we trust Desmond Ford twenty-four centuries
removed from this period? We leave it with the reader to answer this question!
But we are not left to depend on the Aramaic targums to prove that sadaq is very closely related
to Hebrew words which mean ‘cleansing.’ In the Hebrew Old Testament itself, the word sadaq is
frequently coupled in synonymous parallelism with three Hebrew words whose basic meaning is
‘clean’ or ‘pure’ (zakah, bor, taher). Let’s provide some examples:
Job 4:17: ‘Just’ (sadaq) is coupled with ‘pure’ (taher)
Job 15:14: ‘Clean’ (zakah) is coupled with ‘righteous’ (sadaq)
Job 17:9: ‘Righteous’ (sadaq) is coupled with ‘clean’ (taher)
Job 25:4: ‘Justified’ (sadaq) is coupled with ‘clean’ (zakah)
It is noteworthy that these four examples are taken from the oldest book in the Bible. Ellen White
tells us that Moses wrote this book while he was in the desert of Midian tending Jethro’s sheep.
This places us at about 1500 B. C. But, wait a minute. Moses is quoting Job and his friends who
lived around 500 years earlier. This means that as early as 2000 B. C., sadaq, zakah, and taher
were understood as cognate terms!! But let’s look at a few references from other Old Testament
books:
Psalm 19:9: ‘Clean’ (taher) is coupled with ‘righteous’ (sadaq)
Psalm 51:4: ‘Justified’ (sadaq) is coupled with ‘blameless’ (zakah)

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 318 of 369
 Proverbs 20:7-9: ‘Righteous’ (sadaq) is coupled with ‘clean’ (zakah)
Ecclesiastes 9:2: ‘Righteous’ (sadaq) is coupled with ‘clean’ (taher)
Psalm 18:20: ‘Righteousness’ (sadaq) is coupled with ‘blameless’ (bor). It is interesting
that the LXX translates bor with katharioteta (‘cleansed’).
It is interesting to note that in Job 22:3 the word ‘righteous’ in the Hebrew is sadaq but in the
Greek translation it is rendered with amemptos which means ‘blameless’ or ‘faultless’. In Psalm
51:4 the word ‘justified’ is the Hebrew sadaq but the word zakah (‘cleanse’) is rendered in the
LXX as nikao which means ‘to conquer, to overcome, to win the verdict’. It is clear from these
examples that Hebrew and Greek words have many shades of meaning and none of these meanings
is mutually exclusive of others.
Let’s examine some additional passages from both the Old and New Testaments. In Psalm 14:3
and 53:3 David speaks of fools with the following words: ‘they are all together become filthy:
there is none that doeth good, no, not one.’ It is obvious that being filthy is the same as ‘not doing
good’. In Romans 3:10 the apostle Paul quotes these Psalms in the following manner: ‘As it is
written, There is none righteous, no, not one. . . .’ As we compare the words of David with the
rendering by Paul, we discover that being filthy means not being righteous. But the simple law of
deduction we could also say that the opposite is also true: To be clean means to be righteous.
In Isaiah 64:6 the prophet equates our own righteousness with being unclean and wearing filthy
rags. Once again, the idea of righteousness is coupled with the idea of purity.
Several ideas from Isaiah 4:3-5 must be brought to the fore. In this very important passage we have
several important ideas which bear a close relationship with the book of Revelation. There is a
remnant which is left in Zion and in Jerusalem after a devastating destruction. These are called
holy and are found written among the living. The Lord has washed away their filth. This word,
‘filth’ is rhupos in the LXX. It means ‘to issue’ (as in menstruation) and in classical Greek it refers
to a foul greasy and viscous juice like ear wax. Don’t forget this word because we will come back
to it later. Notice also in this passage that the blood of Jerusalem is purged (Greek: ekkathariei,
the same root word for cleansed as in Daniel 8:14) by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of
burning. Don’t forget that in this passage the remnant is washed, purged and made holy as a result
of the judgment. Later on we will see that Revelation 22:11 adds the idea of the remnant being
‘righteous’.
Another important passage is that found in Zechariah 3:1-5. Here we find a clear judicial or court
proceeding. There is an accuser (Satan), a defendant (Joshua: Symbolic of Israel), and a defender
(the Angel of the Lord). There is no doubt that a trial is taking place in this passage and that the
trial is a sanctuary setting. And how do we know this? For two reasons: Because Joshua is
described as the high priest and because later on in the passage a clean mitre is placed on his
forehead. The high priest in Israel wore a mitre which was inscribed with the words: ‘HOLINESS
UNTO THE LORD’.
Notice that Joshua is clothed with filthy garments. Isaiah 61:10 explicitly explains that clean
garments represent righteousness. Filthy garments must then represent unrighteousness (by the
way, the word ‘filthy’ here is the same root word rhupos). Notice that in this judicial proceeding,
the filthy garments are removed and Joshua is clothed with clean garments. God explains the
meaning of this: ‘I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee’ (verse 4). After this, Joshua is
looked upon as holy. Once again, the idea of being cleansed, made holy and clothed with
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 319 of 369
righteousness are used interchangeably. It is significant also that God removes this iniquity in one
day (verse 9) which is undoubtedly a reference to the Day of Atonement. Significant also is that
in the LXX what is removed is identified as anomias (‘transgression of the law’) and adikias
(‘iniquity’).
Now we must turn to three main passages from the book of Revelation. The first is 6:9-11. Here
the martyrs are crying out to God ‘How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and
avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?’ It is clear in this passage that God’s reputation
is being smeared by the death of His saints. Things are going well for the persecutors and the saints
are being mowed down. The question is: When will God vindicate His Name and His saints? (don’t
miss the connection with what the little horn does in Daniel 7 and 8). The answer is that God gives
his martyred saints robes made white in the blood of the lamb (Revelation 7:13-14) and tells them
to rest until the number of martyrs is complete. In other words, there were martyrs in the past and
there will be martyrs in the future. When the martyrs have all died, then God will intervene to
reward them all at the same time. But meanwhile they are given white robes (found worthy by
virtue of Christ’s righteousness) in the pre-advent judgment.
The answer to the question of the martyrs is found in Revelation 19:2-3. After the seven last
plagues have been poured out a great multitude of redeemed people is heard singing in heaven
(19:1). They exclaim: ‘true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore,
which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at
her hand.’ (19:2) Even a cursory glance at this verse reveals its relationship with Revelation 6:9-
11. This is the answer to the question which was asked by the martyrs. God has now revealed his
truth and righteousness by the act of judging the harlot who shed the blood of His people. God’s
people are now exhibited as arrayed in fine linen, clean and white which is identified as the
‘righteousness of saints’ (19:8). Notice that God’s people are now righteous and clean. These two
ideas coalesce.
We must now turn to Revelation 22:11. This verse is found in the epilog of the book (for a complete
study of this verse in its context, listen to pastor Stephen P. Bohr’s audio tape: ‘Revelation’s Life
or Death Message’) After the angel tells John not to seal the book (22:10: Because the door of
probation is still open), he then speaks of a time when the declaration will be made: ‘He that is
unjust (adikon), let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy (rhupon), let him be filthy still: and
he that is righteous (dikaios), let him be righteous still: and he that is holy (jaguios), let him be
holy still’ (probation has closed). Then Jesus comes quickly to reward every one according to their
works (22:12) A look at the words in bold shows that there is a very close relationship between
the idea of being unjust (in Greek: ‘unrighteous’) and the idea of being filthy (yes, in Greek:
rhupoo). On the other hand, God’s people are ‘righteous’ and ‘holy’ (notice in II Chronicles 29:5
that being filthy and being holy are presented as opposites). Incidentally, in Revelation 17:4 the
harlot is represented as ‘filthy’. A close look at Revelation reveals that all the ideas we studied in
Isaiah 4 are present there also. At this point we do not have time or space to trace this parallel.
Perhaps this would be a good assignment for those who are in this class today!!
In the light of what we have studied above, we must ask one final question: If Daniel 8:14 is
dealing with the cleansing of the sanctuary on the Day of Atonement, then why didn’t Daniel use
the Hebrew word taher which is the word for ‘cleansing’ in Leviticus 16? Why did he use the
word sadaq instead? The reason is very simple The Hebrew word taher is a technical term with a
very restricted and narrow meaning. It is used over 50 times in the book of Leviticus to describe

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 320 of 369
cultic/ritual/ceremonial cleansing in connection with the earthly sanctuary service. The use of this
term in Daniel 8:14 would have left the impression that the sanctuary to be cleansed was the earthly
typological sanctuary. But Daniel 8:14 deals with the cleansing, not of the Old Testament shadow/
type but of the heavenly reality/original! Therefore, a broader term needed to be used.
As we have shown, the Hebrew word sadaq has a broad range of meaning which includes
vindication, setting things right, restoring things to the way they originally were, and cleansing.
Thus the word sadaq is like a diamond with many edges—it is one word with many nuances.
Perhaps an analogy from the English language might help us understand. When legal proceedings
are undertaken against an innocent person in our system of jurisprudence, it becomes necessary
for this person to be vindicated. The record must be set straight and the person must be justified
from all charges. When this is done and the person is found innocent, the charges are expunged.
This is a legal word whose meaning is ‘to remove completely, blot out, erase, to cancel, to delete.’
Thus the result of the judgment includes justification, vindication, restoration and giving the person
a clean slate because the charges have been erased! It would be absurd to say that vindication does
not include blotting out (or cleansing, if you please) the charges!! The fact is that in Daniel 8 the
reputation of God and his people has been smeared by the little horn. A judicial proceeding in the
heavenly sanctuary must set the record straight, must vindicate, must justify and must expunge the
false accusations!! Daniel 7 presents a similar scenario. The little horn has killed the saints,
changed the times, changed the law, blasphemed God and things have gone well for it. The record
must be set straight and this is done by opening the books and judging the ostentatious little horn.
At the end of the judgment, the kingdom is given once again to the Son of Man (who is the same
person as the Prince of the host) and to the saints of the Most High to whom it belonged in the first
place!!
There is a remarkable parallel between the thematic sequence of Daniel 8 and Leviticus 1-16. In
Daniel 8:1-12 we find the little horn interfering with the daily ministration of the Prince of the
host. But in Daniel 8:13-14 the focus shifts to the yearly ministration—the justification or
cleansing of the sanctuary. This is the same sequence we find in Leviticus 1-16. In chapters 1-15
we find the emphasis on the daily ministration in the court and in the holy place in favor of the
individual Israelites. But in chapter 16 the focus shifts from the individual Israelite to the cleansing
of the sanctuary.
Some scholars have argued that Daniel 8:14 cannot be connected with Leviticus 16 because in
Daniel 8:14 it is an apostate power which defiles the sanctuary while in Leviticus 16 it is the
confessed sins of God’s people which have defiled it. Are these two emphases mutually exclusive
or are they complementary? Is the sanctuary polluted only by the confessed sins of God’s people
or is it also defiled by the sins of those who profess to be God’s people and yet are impostors?
Let’s take a few moments to study just one passage from the Old Testament to answer these
questions
The book of Zephaniah is fascinating. Though the book deals with God’s judgment upon Israel at
the Babylonian captivity, the language makes it very clear that this judgment prefigures God’s
great judgment at the end of time. We are particularly concerned here with chapter 3 and verses 1-
7:
“Woe to her that is filthy and polluted, to the oppressing city! 2 She obeyed not the voice; she
received not correction; she trusted not in the Lord; she drew not near to her God. 3 Her princes

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 321 of 369
within her are roaring lions; her judges are evening wolves; they gnaw not the bones till the
morrow. 4 Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the
sanctuary, they have done violence to the law. 5 The just Lord is in the midst thereof; he will not
do iniquity: every morning doth he bring his judgment to light, he faileth not; but the unjust
knoweth no shame. 6 I have cut off the nations: their towers are desolate; I made their streets
waste, that none passeth by: their cities are destroyed, so that there is no man, that there is none
inhabitant. 7 I said: ‘Surely thou wilt fear me, thou wilt receive instruction; so their dwelling should
not be cut off, howsoever I punished them: but they rose early, and corrupted all their doings.’”
Here God calls Jerusalem (the city where His own people dwell) ‘filthy’ and ‘polluted’ (verse1).
In verse 5 the filthy and polluted ones are called ‘unjust’. Once again we find a link between the
idea of being filthy and being unjust or unrighteous. God’s own people are accused of not obeying
His voice (verse 2). Then the religious leaders are singled out in this apostasy—the princes, the
judges, the prophets and the priests (verses 3 and 4). Of particular significance is the declaration
in verse 4 that ‘her priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law.’ So it
is possible for apostate priests who claim to serve God to pollute the sanctuary! (See also Ezekiel
8). For this reason, God promises to come in judgment against those who profess to be His own
people. Verse 8 makes it very clear that this judgment has much more than Israel in view. It is a
judgment of the whole world at the end of time. The rest of the chapter is composed of promises
of restoration for those who remain faithful to God. Of particular significance is verse 13 which is
parallel to Revelation 14 where the 144,000 are described.
Comments on Verses 26, 27
In verse 26 Daniel is told that the chazon (the entire vision of Daniel 8) is for many days and that
he should shut it up. It is very important to realize that up to this point (in the first seven chapters
of Daniel), God has not told Daniel to shut up anything. It is only starting in chapter 8 that the
vision is sealed. This is clear evidence that the little sealed book of Daniel 12:4 and Revelation 10
is composed only of the portion of Daniel which deals with the 2300 days.
Verse 27 will not only mark the conclusion to chapter 8 but will also provide the introduction to
chapter 9. This verse is of the utmost importance. When the angel told Daniel that the vision was
for ‘many days’ and that he should seal it, he Daniel got sick and was faint for several days. Why
did this happen to Daniel? He explains: “I was astonished at the vision (mareh) but none
understood it.”
Daniel was confused about the mareh portion of the chazon. Even though God had explained the
meaning of the ram, the he-goat and the little horn (the chazon), he was still confused about the
mareh. The only element left unexplained in chapter 8 was the time aspect, the 2300 days. In
chapter 8 there is no beginning point for the 2300 days and God had not explained how the 2300
days were related to the 70-week prophecy of Jeremiah. In chapter 9 God will fill in the missing
information so that Daniel can understand!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 322 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #22 – NOTES ON DANIEL 9

Overview of Daniel 9 and its Historical Context (538 BC)

As chapter 9 begins, Jerusalem was in ruins and the prophet was diligently studying the seventy-
year prophecy of Jeremiah 25:9-13. There was a specific reason why Daniel was studying this
particular prophecy. Through Jeremiah, God had promised that the captivity of Israel would last
only seventy years. But eleven years earlier, God had seemed to indicate that the sanctuary and the
people would be trampled underfoot for 2300 years (Daniel 8:14). This apparent discrepancy
perplexed Daniel. He could not comprehend how the prophecy of Jeremiah 25 could be reconciled
with the one in Daniel 8:14.
Daniel then uttered one of the most deeply spiritual prayers in the Bible. He first confessed his sin
and that of his people (verses 4-11). Next he described the results of his sin and that of his people
(verses 11-14), and finally he interceded before God, asking Him to restore Israel to its land
(verses 15-19). The urgency of Daniel’s prayer was directly related to the vision he had received
eleven years earlier (Daniel 8). He seemed to surmise that perhaps God now intended to prolong
the seventy years to 2300 because of the covenant unfaithfulness of Israel. Obviously, Daniel did
not want the seventy years to be extended to 2300, so he poured out his heart to God, pleading for
forgiveness.

In response to Daniel’s plea, God sent Gabriel to inform him that his prayer had been accepted and
that an explanation would be given (9:20-23). The desolation of Jerusalem in Daniel 9:2 motivated
Daniel’s prayer and the promise of Jerusalem’s restoration and rebuilding was the answer to his
prayer.
In verses 24-27 Gabriel explained that the city of Jerusalem and its people would be given another
opportunity. The city, temple and walls would be rebuilt according to the schedule of Jeremiah’s
prophecy. Seventy weeks (490 years) would be given Israel to redeem her past failures. At the
very end of this period, God would even send Messiah the Prince who would make a final urgent
appeal to Israel. But this appeal would fall upon deaf ears and as a result the theocracy would come
to an end, Jerusalem would be destroyed, the temple demolished and the people scattered among
the nations.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 323 of 369
Links between Daniel 8 and 9

Almost all Protestant and Roman Catholic scholars fail to link Daniel 8 with Daniel 9. This is
puzzling in that there are multiple textual and contextual reasons to link the two chapters. Let’s
take a look at several reasons why these two chapters must be connected:
In Daniel 8 contains a vision (chazon) in verses 1-12 and an audition (that is, two angels speaking
to each other) in verses 13-14. Gabriel then explains the vision in verses 19-26. A close
examination of this chapter reveals that while all the elements of the vision proper were explained,
the audition was left unexplained. This was presumably due to the fact that Daniel got ill and
Gabriel was not able to finish his explanation (Daniel 8:27). It appears that Daniel’s illness was
caused by his inability to reconcile the meaning of Jeremiah’s seventy-year prophecy with the
prophecy of the 2300 days. After all, how could God’s people be restored to their land after seventy
years, if their city and temple were to be trampled upon by the little horn for 2300 years?
When Daniel received the vision of chapter 8 in 550 B. C., Babylon had not yet fallen. On the
other hand, when the events of Daniel 9 transpired in 538 B. C., Babylon had just fallen and Medo-
Persia had taken over the kingdom (see, Daniel 5). Daniel knew that the fall of Babylon was the
harbinger that Israel would soon be released from bondage. And yet nothing could be seen on the
horizon to indicate that such a release was imminent. Daniel knew that Jeremiah’s seventy years
had begun in 605 B. C., when he and his three friends had been taken to Babylon. Therefore, he
also understood that the release of Israel must take place around the year 536 B C
There can be little doubt that the prophecy of the 2300 days/years haunted Daniel at this point in
time. He surmised that Israel’s unfaithfulness was so great, that God had decided to prolong
Israel’s captivity from seventy years to 2300. This is the reason why, at the start of chapter 9,
Daniel was studying Jeremiah’s seventy-year prophecy (Daniel 9:1-2). He wanted to know how
this prophecy was related to the 2300 days/years.
Daniel’s prayer, which immediately follows his study of Jeremiah’s prophecy, includes a
confession of Israel’s sin and an appeal to God’s mercy. The word ‘defer’ at the climax of his
prayer has profound significance (verse 19). The Hebrew achar is variously translated in the Old
Testament. It can mean ‘to loiter, to delay, to procrastinate, to hinder, to tarry, to slacken.’ In
Exodus 22:29 it is translated ‘delay.’ In Genesis 24:56 it is rendered ‘hinder.’ In Deuteronomy
23:21 uses ‘slack.’ Judges 5:28 translates ‘tarry’ as does Habakkuk 2:3 and Proverbs 23:30. Daniel
feared that God would delay the release of Israel beyond the seventy years and so he poured out
his heart in prayer appealing to God’s covenant loyalty and faithfulness.
The very same angel who had explained the vision of Daniel 8 came back to explain the time
element which had been left unexplained (Daniel 8:16-17, 26; 9:21-23)). To put it differently, the
angel came back to finish in Daniel 9 what he had started in Daniel 8. Thus these two chapters are
linked by the very same angel, Gabriel!
Furthermore, it is of more than passing interest that the unexplained time element of Daniel 8 was
later explained in Daniel 9 by the same angel who began his explanation with a time prophecy!!
That is to say, the unexplained time element of Daniel 8 was explained with a time prophecy in
Daniel 9.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 324 of 369
Gabriel told Daniel: ‘Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city.’
(Daniel 9:24, KJV). The word ‘determined’ in the Hebrew is chatak. It can mean ‘to cut, to decide,
to decree, to ordain, to appoint.’ The New English Bible translates it ‘marked out.’ The word
appears only this time in the Hebrew Bible but in Mishnaic Hebrew it is frequently used in a literal
sense to describe the act of cutting off parts of animals for the sacrificial service, the cutting off
of the foreskin in circumcision, the cutting off of a lamp wick and a miner cutting out ore from a
mountain. Figuratively, the word is also used to describe the act of cutting or dividing a Bible verse
into two parts for study.
The root meaning of this word, then, appears to be ‘cut off.’ Now, when something is cut off, it
must be cut off from something! For example, if you are going to cut a branch off a tree there must
be a tree to cut it off from!! This being the case, we must ask: ‘From what are the seventy weeks
cut off?’ The answer is simple: It must have been cut off from the larger prophecy of the 2300
days/years.
A close inspection of Daniel 8 and 9 shows that both chapters share a common central theme. Both
chapters deal with the trampling of the city, the people, the sanctuary and the Prince (compare
Daniel 8:11-14, 25 with Daniel 9:3-19, 25-26). However, (we shall study this in more detail when
we deal with Daniel 11) while Daniel 8 focuses primarily on the trampling of spiritual Israel by
the papacy (see, Daniel 8:13; Revelation 11:2; Daniel 11:31; Revelation 17:1-5; Matthew
24:15), Daniel 9 has to do with the trampling of literal Israel by Rome (see, Daniel 9:26-27; Luke
21:20; Matthew 24:15).
It is obvious that Daniel did not clearly comprehend the shift from literal Israel to spiritual Israel.
If he had understood this, he would have realized that the seventy weeks apply to the literal Jews
in literal Jerusalem with a literal temple while the 2300 days have to do with spiritual Israel in
spiritual Jerusalem with a spiritual temple. Daniel’s failure to comprehend this distinction led him
to believe that the 2300 days applied to literal Israel, an idea he could not reconcile with Jeremiah’s
seventy-year prophecy.
Succinctly, Daniel 8 refers to both pagan and papal Rome. Daniel 9 then picks up on the destruction
of literal Jerusalem by pagan Rome and Daniel 10-12 take us further ahead to the destruction of
spiritual Jerusalem by papal Rome. Perhaps this is the reason why Daniel 8 provides only one little
horn to represent both imperial and papal Rome. Daniel 9 then explains the role of pagan Rome in
the desolation of literal Israel while Daniel 10-12 expounds upon the role of papal Rome in the
trampling of spiritual Israel.
After God gave Daniel the vision of chapter 8, Gabriel was commanded (the verb is imperative)
to help Daniel understand (bin) it (8:16; see also 8:15-17, 23). Gabriel then undertook the task of
explaining the meaning of the ram, the he-goat and the little horn (8:19-25). Yet at the end of
chapter 8 we are informed that Daniel was ‘astonished at the vision, but none understood (bin)’
(8:27). It becomes obvious that if Daniel did not understand the vision at the end of the chapter,
then Gabriel had not completed his commanded mission! We would therefore expect Gabriel to
come back at some time to complete his mission. Did he come back?
In Daniel 9:2 we are told that Daniel understood (bin) that Jeremiah’s prophecy was to be fulfilled
at the end of the seventy years. But, as we have seen, there were many things which Daniel still
did not understand. Therefore, in Daniel 9:22-23 we find Gabriel returning to speak with Daniel.
He told Daniel that he had come to give him understanding (verse 22, bin) and then, in the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 325 of 369
imperative, he commands Daniel: ‘understand (bin) the matter, and consider (bin) the vision
(mareh).’ The question which begs to be asked at this point is: ‘Understand which vision?’ To this
point in Daniel 9 there has been no vision, only a prayer. This must mean that Gabriel returned to
explain the vision of the previous chapter. Significantly, after Gabriel gave his added explanation
in Daniel 9 we are told that Daniel ‘understood (bin) the thing, and had understanding (bin) in the
vision’ (Daniel 10:1; mareh). Obviously, the further explanation of Daniel 9 cleared up many
misconceptions which Daniel had entertained after the vision of Daniel 8.
Another clear link between the two chapters is Daniel’s remark: ‘Yea, whiles I was speaking in
prayer, even the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to
fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation.’ (Daniel 9:21). The expression
‘whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning’ clearly echoes back to Daniel 8:16. It bears
repeating that there was no new vision in Daniel 9 so Daniel must be referring to the vision given
in Daniel 8. This is irrefutable evidence that the vision spoken of by Gabriel in Daniel 9 is the
same as the one which had given in Daniel 8.
Even though the vision of Daniel 8 was given during the reign of Babylon (8:1), Daniel was already
in Shusan, the capital of the Medo-Persian kingdom. It is noteworthy that God began the vision
with Medo-Persia and not with Babylon! The prayer and explanation in Daniel 9 also occur within
the time frame of the Medo-Persian kingdom (Daniel 8:2, 20; 9:1). Though Media will be dropped
in chapters 10-12 and only Persia will be referred to, the fact still remains that all the visions and
explanations of Daniel 8-12 are given within the time frame of the Medo-Persian kingdom. This
would seem to indicate that all these chapters deal with the same subject matter.
A structural matter will also help us discern the relationship between the two chapters. A close
look at the great chain prophecies of the book of Daniel reveals that each has a vision and its
corresponding explanation, except for Daniel 11. Notice the following:
Daniel 2: Has a dream or vision and an auditory explanation
Daniel 7: Has a dream and an auditory explanation
Daniel 8: Has a vision and an auditory explanation
Daniel 9: Has only an auditory explanation
Daniel 10-12: Have only auditory explanations but no new vision

The fact that the last vision of Daniel is in chapter 8 (with the exception of the personal theophany
of Jesus in chapter 10) would seem to indicate that the rest of the book is simply an auditory
explanation of this chapter. This means that there is no new material of substance given after
Daniel 8. Chapters 9-12 simply explain and amplify the vision and audition already given in
chapter 8. This would seem to prove that Daniel 8-12 is a book within a book, that is to say, the
sealed book of Daniel 12:4.

Comments on Verse 23
In response to Daniel’s prayer (verses 3-19), Gabriel arrived to further explain the vision of
Daniel 8. It is significant that he not only came to explain the mareh or audition, but also the
chazon or vision. In other words, he began his explanation in Daniel 9 at the very same point where
he had begun his explanation of Daniel 8, that is, with Persia. This he must do in order to indicate
that the 2300 days would begin within the historical time frame of Persia. Gabriel said: ‘I am come

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 326 of 369
to shew thee; for thou art greatly beloved; therefore understand (bin) the matter; and consider
(bin) the vision (chazon).’ Then Gabriel undertook the task of explaining the seventy weeks. To
this we must now turn our attention.

Remarks on the Literary Structure of Daniel 9:24-27

The prophecy of the 70 weeks appears to be, in a literary sense, a disorganized mumbo jumbo. Yet
a careful study of the literary structure reveals a beautiful symmetry. Notice in the following chart
that the description alternates between the city and people on the one hand and Messiah the Prince
on the other:

Introduction: ‘Going Forth of the Word’

City and People Messiah the Prince

‘Restore and build Jerusalem’ ‘Messiah the Prince’

‘seven weeks’ ‘sixty-two weeks’

‘after the sixty two-weeks shall Messiah be

‘the street shall be built again, and the wall,
cut off’
even in troublous times’

‘the people of the Prince that shall come ‘He [the Prince] shall confirm the covenant
shall destroy the city and the sanctuary and with many for one week: and in the midst of
the end thereof shall be with a flood’ the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the
oblation to cease’

Conclusion: ‘and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until
the consummation, and that determined shall be poured out upon the desolate’.

The Accomplishments of the Seventy Weeks

According to Daniel 9:24 six major accomplishments would be completed within the Seventy
Week period. Let’s take a look at them.
‘Finish the transgression.’ The word ‘transgression’ here is the strongest word for sin in the Old
Testament. It literally means ‘rebellion’ or ‘revolt.’ This was not rebellion in general terms. The
use of the definite article indicates that this was a specific rebellion. In other words, the Seventy
Weeks would bring an end to the revolt of the Jewish nation. As we shall see in our detailed study
of the Seventy Weeks which follows, their rebellion against God could come to an end in one of
two ways: 1) They could receive the Messiah and thus bring their constant rebellion to an end, or,

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 327 of 369
2) they could irrevocably revolt against the Messiah and thus bring the theocracy to an end. This
prophecy clearly indicates that they would choose the second option.

‘To make an end of sins.’ Notice that we are not told that the seventy weeks would bring sinning
to an end but rather sins to an end! Jesus made an end of sins by bearing them on the cross. Jesus,
legally, took away the sin of the world (John 1:29). Hebrews 1:3 tells us that when Jesus ‘had by
Himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.’ In Hebrews 9:28 we
are told that ‘Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many. . .’ In Hebrews 9:26 we are
unequivocally told that Jesus, ‘once in the end of the world hath appeared to put away sin by the
sacrifice of Himself.’ And in Hebrews 10:12 we are told that ‘this man, [Jesus] after he had offered
one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God.’

‘To make reconciliation for iniquity.’ Jesus reconciled man to God by His sacrifice. In the
Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53 we are told that the Messiah would bring peace through His work:
‘But He was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement
of our peace was upon him: and with his stripes we are healed.’ In Romans 5:10 we are told why
man needed peace: ‘For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his
Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.’ In II Corinthians 5:18-21 the
apostle Paul amplifies the idea of reconciliation through Christ: ‘To wit, that God was in Christ,
reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them. . . . For he [the
Father] hath made him [Jesus] to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the
righteousness of God in him.’

‘To bring in everlasting righteousness.’ In Jeremiah 23:6 we are told that one of the names of
Jesus is, ‘The Lord our Righteousness.’ And in the Messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53:11 we are told:
‘by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.’ This
thought is developed in the New Testament on repeated occasions. For example, in Romans 3 and
4 the apostle Paul fully expounds this idea of Christ our righteousness. By living a sinless life,
Jesus wove a perfect robe of His righteousness which He is willing to impute to all who believe.
This righteousness is available right now in Jesus. When we receive Jesus we have His life now (I
John 5:11-12), we are citizens of heaven (Philippians 3:20), we are accepted in the beloved and
seated in heaven with Him (Ephesians 1:6; 2:6). Of course, there is an already and a not yet. We
can have his imputed and imparted righteousness even now but to live in a world where only
righteousness dwells empirically is still future: ‘Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look
for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.’ (II Peter 3:13).

‘To seal up the vision and prophecy.’ At this point we will not say much about this phrase because
we will deal with it extensively later. Suffice it to say now, that by rejecting the Messiah, the
Jewish nation brought the vision and prophecy of the 70 weeks to an end. God would no longer
communicate with Israel through prophets and visions. When they stoned Stephen, as he was
having a vision of Christ and was fulfilling his role as a prophet, God’s communications to Israel
came to a final end. That is to say, Stephen received the last vision and was the last prophet which
God sent to Israel.

‘To anoint the most holy.’ The phrase literally reads: ‘to anoint the holy of holies.’ This phrase
can be understood in one of two ways: 1) the ‘most Holy’ is a reference to the Messiah as a person

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 328 of 369
(see Hebrews 7:26), or, 2) the ‘most Holy’ refers to the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary.
How must we understand this anointing of the most holy?

When the Old Testament tabernacle services were inaugurated the high priest, as well as the
sanctuary in its totality, (including the most holy place) were anointed. In harmony with the type,
when Jesus ascended to heaven to begin His heavenly ministry, the entire heavenly sanctuary was
anointed as well (including the most holy place).

But not only was the sanctuary anointed. Jesus was also anointed as priest/king to begin His work
in the holy place (Acts 2:32-36 in the light of the background given in Leviticus 8:1-12).

Ellen White makes this enlightening statement:

“Christ's ascension to heaven was the signal that His followers were to receive the promised
blessing. For this they were to wait before they entered upon their work. When Christ passed within
the heavenly gates, He was enthroned amidst the adoration of the angels. As soon as this ceremony
was completed, the Holy Spirit descended upon the disciples in rich currents, and Christ was
indeed glorified, even with the glory which He had with the Father from all eternity. The
Pentecostal outpouring was Heaven's communication that the Redeemer's inauguration was
accomplished. According to His promise He had sent the Holy Spirit from heaven to His followers,
as a token that He had, as Priest and King, received all authority in heaven and on earth, and was
the Anointed One over His people.” God’s Amazing Grace, p. 193

We must conclude, therefore, that the anointing of the most holy must refer to Jesus as a person as
well as to the most holy place of the sanctuary. This means that the seventy-week prophecy refers
to all the highlights of Jesus’ mission—His baptism, death, resurrection and ascension to the right
hand of God to begin His ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.

‘From the Going Forth of the Word’

We find the following words at the beginning of Gabriel’s explanation of the seventy weeks:
‘. . . from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem. . .’ (Daniel 9:25) There
are two issues we wish to settle as we study the meaning of this expression: 1) How should ‘word’
(dabar) be translated, and, 2) When was this ‘word’ given?
Regarding the first issue, the word dabar is very common in the Old Testament. Its usual and
proper translation is ‘word’. But is this the best translation in the context of Daniel 9? There are
several instances in the Old Testament where dabar should be translated in the sense of a royal
‘decree’ or ‘command’. For instance, in Isaiah 45:23 the word dabar is used in conjunction with
an oath. A word with an oath takes on the form of a royal decree. In Esther 1:19 the word is used
in the sense of a royal commandment to be incorporated into the law code of the Medes and
Persians to the effect that Vashti would never again appear before the king. In Ezra 7:13 Artaxerxes
Longanimus gives a royal decree (dabar) which authorizes the Jews to return to Jerusalem. These
two references in Esther and Ezra are particularly significant because, as we shall see, they are
found in sources which are directly related to the historical context of Daniel 9.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 329 of 369
Besides Daniel 9:25, the word dabar also appears two verses earlier in 9:23. There, Gabriel is
given a command (dabar) by God to explain the 70 weeks to Daniel. Thus, in Daniel 9:25 we have
a horizontal royal command (Artaxerxes to the Jews) and in Daniel 9:23 we have a vertical
command or decree (God to Gabriel).
The formula ‘from. . . unto’ in verse 25 also proves that the 70 weeks’ time period is not merely
some general, unspecific time period. This formula clearly indicates that the 70 weeks have a
specific, discernible, starting and ending point.

Four Possible Decrees

Four dates have been suggested as the fulfillment of the decree to restore and build Jerusalem. At
this point make reference to the chart at the end of the notes on Daniel 9.
The decree of Cyrus the Great in 536 BC: This cannot be the date for the beginning of the 70
weeks for two reasons:

First of all, a beginning date of 536 BC makes it impossible for the 70 weeks to be fulfilled in the
Messiah. Four hundred and eighty-three years after 536 B. C., would take us to the year 53 B. C.,
a date far too early for the coming of the Messiah.

Secondly, both Ezra 1:2-4 and II Chronicles 36:23 make it crystal clear that Cyrus’ decree did not
authorize the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem. It only gave permission to rebuild the temple.
How then do we explain Isaiah 44:28 and 45:13? Don’t these texts say that Cyrus would give a
decree to rebuild the city? These verses in Isaiah are to be understood as Cyrus beginning the
process which would ultimately lead to the rebuilding of the city. They are not to be taken to mean
that he would give a command to rebuild the city.

Both Ezra and II Chronicles give us the actual decree and nothing is said there about the rebuilding
of the city. Finally, for the sake of argument, even if Cyrus had given a decree to rebuild the city
(which he clearly did not) this would still not fulfill the specifications of the prophecy of Daniel
9:25. This prophecy requires a decree not only to rebuild Jerusalem but also to restore it. As we
shall see later, restoring and building are two separate, though related, ideas.

The Confirmatory Decree of Darius I (Darius the Persian) in 520: This decree does not fulfill
the specifications of Daniel 9:25 either.

The extant Biblical evidence indicates that when Cyrus gave his decree, many of God’s people
returned to Jerusalem with great enthusiasm to rebuild the temple (Ezra 2). The foundation of the
temple was quickly laid but then Samaritan opposition halted the work. As a result of this
Samaritan opposition (Ezra 4:1-5), the people ceased building the temple and focused on their
own personal affairs. This sad condition is described in Haggai 1:1-11. For over 15 years the
temple remained with only the foundation laid. But then, in 520, Darius I reaffirmed the decree
which had been given in 536 by Cyrus (Ezra 6:1-13). Even a cursory reading of this decree reveals
that it was simply a reconfirmation of the decree which had been given previously by Cyrus. It
gave only permission to rebuild the temple, not the city.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 330 of 369
This decree led Zerubbabel, Joshua, Zechariah and Haggai to encourage the people to awaken from
their slumber and continue the work of rebuilding the temple. The book of Haggai describes the
renewed enthusiasm of the people. As a result of Darius’ decree and the leadership of Zerubbabel,
Joshua, Zechariah and Haggai, the temple was finished in only five years (Nehemiah 6:15)!
The Decree of Artaxerxes I in 457:

The Biblical evidence indicates that this is the only decree which fulfills the specifications of
Daniel 9:25. As we have already seen, neither of the previous two decrees gave permission for the
Jews to rebuild and restore the city. On the other hand, this decree of Artaxerxes says nothing
about the actual rebuilding of the temple. It only states that Artaxerxes gave gifts for the temple
which had already been rebuilt! The book of Ezra leaves no doubt that this was the third decree
given by Persian kings (Ezra 6:14-15). We have noted previously that the first two do not meet
the specifications of Daniel 9:25 so we must take a closer look at this third decree which is found
in Ezra 7:11-26 (see also, Prophets and Kings, p. 610)

But before we scrutinize the decree as such, it would be well to underline that Artaxerxes’ decree
was given in the year 457 B. C. This date can be derived from Ezra 7:7-8 where we are told that
the decree was given in the fall of the seventh year of Artaxerxes. The year 457 B. C., as the
seventh year of king Artaxerxes, is one of the most firmly rooted dates in ancient history. The work
of Siegfried Horn and Kenneth Wood, The Chronology of Ezra 7, is definitive in settling the
reliability of this date.

Regarding this date, Old Testament Scholar Angel Manuel Rodriguez states:

“The seventh year of the reign of Artaxerxes (457 B.C.) is a well-established date in ancient
history. According to Greek sources, Xerxes, the father of Artaxerxes, died during the last part of
465 B.C. An Egyptian astronomical texts suggests that he died between December and the Persian
new year in the spring. Babylonian astronomical texts and papyrus documents found in the island
of Elephantine, in Egypt, confirm the fact that Artaxerxes ascended to the throne in 465 B.C. That
was his accession year; his first full year as king began in the spring of 464 B. C., when the new
year started. Artaxerxes’ seventh year would then be 457 B.C.

Some have suggested that during the postexilic period the Jews used a spring-to-spring calendar
and that, consequently, the seventh year of the king would be 458 B.C. The biblical evidence points
to the opposite conclusion. Studies made in the Chronology of the kings of Judah indicate that the
civil calendar used in Jerusalem ran from fall to fall. This was also the case during the exilic
period (Ezekiel. 1:2; 8:1; 40:1), and during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah (Nehemiah 1:1; 2:1).
Ezra’s calendar was a fall-to-fall one, making the seventh year of Artaxerxes 457 B.C.” Angel
Manuel Rodriguez, “The Sanctuary and its Cleansing,” Supplement to the Adventist Review,
September, 1994.

Now let’s make a few remarks about the decree. It will be noticed that Daniel 9:25 requires a
decree to both restore and build Jerusalem. Nothing short of this can fulfill the specifications of
the prophecy. As we shall see below, restore and build, though related, do not mean the same
thing. We shall find that ‘build’ refers to the actual physical construction of the city, while ‘restore’
is a reference to the reestablishment of the governance of the city according to the specifications
of the Hebrew theocracy. It is clear that the decree of Artaxerxes gave Ezra the right to reestablish
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 331 of 369
the theocratic governance of Israel by appointing magistrates and judges to judge the people
according to the law of God (Ezra 7:25). It also gave the judges and magistrates the right to punish
violations or did it give permission to build the city?

In Ezra 4:7-23 (the passage, for some unexplainable reason, was inserted at this point in the book
of Ezra though it is out of chronological order with what comes before and after) we are told that
in the early reign of Artaxerxes, the returned exiles were in the process of rebuilding the city,
when their enemies—Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel and the rest of their Samaritan companions—
sent a letter to King Artaxerxes complaining that the Jews were ‘building the rebellious and the
bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and joined the foundations.’ (Ezra 4:12). They then
requested that the king put a halt to the endeavor for his own good (Ezra 4:13-16). As a result,
Artaxerxes sent a letter to the enemies of the Jews commanding them to compel the Jews to halt
their work (Ezra 4:18-23). This they did, pronto! (Ezra 4:23). But notice that Artaxerxes left the
door open because he said: ‘cause these men to cease, and that this city shall not be builded, until
another commandment shall be given from me.’ (Ezra 4:21). Though the word ‘another’ is not
part of the Hebrew text, it is interesting the KJV translators believed that a decree had already been
given once before by Artaxerxes authorizing the city to be rebuilt!

It is highly unlikely that the Jews would have begun building the city without permission from the
king. I believe that the scenario is as follows: The decree of 457 B. C., was the original decree
given by Artaxerxes authorizing the rebuilding of the city by the Jews. But after he gave this
decree, the enemies of the Jews, alarmed by the idea that the Jews would soon function as a
theocracy again, sent a slanderous letter to the king and this letter led him to suspend the decree
he had given until the matter could be further reviewed. The building project was suspended and
remained so until several years later. In the twentieth year of Artaxerxes we find that Jerusalem
was still in ruins. In fact, Nehemiah describes the situation to king Artaxerxes: ‘. . . the city, the
place of my fathers’ sepulchres, lieth waste, and the gates thereof are consumed with fire. . .’
(Nehemiah 2:3). The significant point here is that the city was still in ruins in 445 B. C. even
though Artaxerxes had given the decree to build and restore the city in 457 B. C. And why was it
still in ruins? The best explanation is that Artaxerxes had suspended his first decree because of the
slanderous accusations of the Samaritans.

We shall have much more to say about this decree when we analyze the meaning of the word
‘street’ and ‘wall’ in Daniel 9:25. But now let’s turn to the fourth ‘decree.’
Permission Given to Nehemiah to Rebuild the City and Walls in 445: Why have I put the word
decree in quotation marks? Simply because this was not a decree at all. It simply gave Nehemiah
personal permission to go to Jerusalem and to lead out in the task of rebuilding the city and the
walls. This was not a new decree, but rather a reinstatement of the suspended decree which was
given in 457 B. C.

In Nehemiah 2-6 we find the fascinating story of the rebuilding of Jerusalem. The narration begins
with Nehemiah downcast because the city of Jerusalem ‘lies waste and the gates are burned with
fire’ (Nehemiah 2:3). When Artaxerxes sees Nehemiah’s grief he asks why he is so downcast.
Nehemiah explains that it is because of the condition of his beloved city. The king then says to
Nehemiah: ‘For what dost thou make request?’ (Nehemiah 2:4). This was the moment Nehemiah
had been waiting for. He said to the king: ‘. . . send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers’
sepulchres, that I may build it.’ (Nehemiah 2:5). In response, the king gave Nehemiah letters of
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 332 of 369
permission to return to Jerusalem to undertake the task of rebuilding and provided an escort
(Nehemiah 2:7-9).

Chapters 2-6 describe the rebuilding of the walls and the gate in the midst of tremendous opposition
from Sanballat, Tobias and Geshem. These men and their sympathizers used every stratagem in
their arsenal to try and impede the work of rebuilding, but their every plot was disarmed. The result
was extraordinary the wall and gates were finished in only 52 days (Nehemiah 6:15; for more on
this period of trial, read Prophets and Kings, pp. 609, 628-29, 635-680).

But what took place after the rebuilding was finished is as important at the building itself. When
the construction was finished, genealogical records were set straight (chapter 7), the book of the
law was read at the feast of booths—the captivity had ended and they now dwelt in their own land
(chapter 8), the history of Israel was reviewed and the covenant renewed (chapter 9, especially
verse 38), the covenant ritual was restored (chapter 10), the land was restored to those who had
returned (chapter 11), and various violations of the book of the law were corrected (chapter 13).
All of these actions in Nehemiah 7-13 constitute a restoration of the Hebrew theocracy in harmony
with the laws of God.

No doubt there were still many things which needed to be corrected (the book of Malachi describes
some of these) and no doubt the enemies of Israel continued to offer opposition. But by the year
408, the city had been fully rebuilt and the theocracy’s civil and religious system was in full force.
The forty-nine years between the giving of Artaxerxes’ decree and the completion of the building
and restoring of Jerusalem were certainly turbulent and troublous times.

One further point needs to be made. The permission given by Artaxerxes to Nehemiah cannot
fulfill the decree of Daniel 9:25 for chronological reasons. As we shall see, the ‘anointed one’ was
to come 483 years after the decree was given. If we begin the 483 years in 445 B. C., the Messiah
would have to have been baptized in 37 A. D. No scholar that I know of ever suggests that Jesus
began his public ministry in 37 A. D. This would mean that Jesus was crucified in the year 41 A.
D. and Stephen was stoned in the year 44. This simply does not fit the historical data.
In conclusion, we have seen that there were four ‘decrees’ relating to the return of the Jews after
the exile. Two of these decrees were ‘original’ and the other two were simply ‘confirmatory.’
Notice:

536: Original decree of Cyrus to rebuild the temple—suspended by Cambyses in 522

520: Decree of Darius I B Confirmed Cyrus’ decree and revoked Cambyses’ suspension.
457: Original Decree of Artaxerxes I to restore and build Jerusalem—suspended by
Artaxerxes himself early in his reign when the Samaritans complained.
445: ‘Decree’ of Artaxerxes I—revoked the previous suspension and confirmed his
original decree to Nehemiah.

‘To Restore and Build Jerusalem’

Many have overlooked the fact that in order for Daniel 9:25 to be fulfilled, a decree must be given
to both restore and build Jerusalem, in that order. Some commentators have simply assumed that
both of these words mean basically the same thing. But is this the case?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 333 of 369
In order to understand what it means to restore and build Jerusalem we must first comprehend
what ‘Jerusalem’ means. Frequently, when the Bible speaks of ‘Jerusalem’ it is not merely
referring to the physical city but rather to the city as a polis, that is, as a living social, religious and
political entity composed of people, commerce, rulers, magistrates, judges and civil and religious
laws. In order for the city to function as a polis it must have self-governance as well as legal
sovereignty over the land.
The captivity of Jerusalem involved far more than the destruction of the physical city. In fact,
Jerusalem lost its governance before the city was destroyed. In Daniel 1:1-3 we are told that
Nebuchadnezzar came to Jerusalem in 605 and besieged it. He took king Jehoiakim captive as well
as the royal seed and the princes. Thus Jerusalem lost her political autonomy or right to self-
governance. She became subservient to Babylon. Even though the physical city of Jerusalem was
not destroyed at this time, the seventy-year captivity of Jerusalem did begin.
It cannot be emphasized too strongly that the captivity of Jerusalem began 19 years before the
physical city was actually destroyed! Of course we know that in 586, the city itself was finally
destroyed (II Chronicles 36:17-20). At that time the land was laid waste, the religious cultus came
to an end, and the remaining political and military leaders were removed. Now Jerusalem had a
double whammy: She had lost her political/religious autonomy and the physical city was in ruins.
This two-fold idea is expressed clearly in Jeremiah 25:11 where we are told that the whole land
was to be a desolation and astonishment and the nations [including Israel] would serve the king of
Babylon for 70 years. II Kings 24 describes the actual destruction of the city and the temple. We
are told in II Kings 24:14-15:

“And he [Nebuchadnezzar] carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty
men of valor, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths: none remained, save
the poorest sort of the people of the land. And he carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon. . . .”
Obviously, Nebuchadnezzar did not carry away the physical city of Jerusalem. ‘Jerusalem’ here
refers to a socio/political entity composed of king, officers, military men and craftsmen (in actual
fact, Daniel himself attributes the loss of self-governance and the destruction of the city to the
apostasy of the kings, princes, fathers and judges [Daniel 9:6, 8, 12])
Now, in order for Jerusalem to be reestablished in her previous position after the captivity, two
things must happen: Her political/religious self-determination must be restored and the physical
city must be built. These two tasks, though related, are not identical. The word ‘build’ refers to
the reconstruction of the physical city. But what does the word ‘restore’ mean? The word ‘restore’
means ‘to give back to’ or ‘to return to a condition which existed before.’
In Judges 11:13 the king of the children of Ammon complains to Jephthah: ‘Israel took away my
land, when they came out of Egypt.’ He then makes the appeal: ‘now therefore restore those lands
again peaceably.’ In II Samuel 9:7, David promised Mephibosheth: ‘I will restore thee all the land
of Saul thy father.’ In both of these texts the emphasis falls on legally giving back land to an
original owner.
In 2 Kings 14:22 we have the same two words which appear in Daniel 9:25. There we are told that
Azariah ‘built Elath and restored it to Judah.’ This text makes it clear that ‘build’ and ‘restore,’
though related, are not identical. What the text means is that the physical city of Elath was built
and then governance over it was given to Judah.
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 334 of 369
In I Kings 12:21 we are told that Rehoboam came to Jerusalem and laid plans to ‘fight against the
house of Israel, to bring the kingdom again [literally, to restore the kingdom] to Rehoboam the
son of Solomon.’ In II Samuel 8:3 we are informed that David went on a military campaign to
‘recover [restore] his border at the river Euphrates.’
None of the examples presented above have to do with the physical rebuilding of a city. The central
idea is to legally restore land, to legally restore political governance or to restore the legitimate
borders of the kingdom. We therefore must conclude that ‘restore’ in Daniel 9:25 does not have
to do so much with the physical rebuilding of the city of Jerusalem as such, but rather with the
legal restoration of the land to its original owner and a giving back of the right to political self-
governance according to the laws of God. The actual building of the city then follows. As we have
previously seen, only the decree of Artaxerxes meets the criteria necessary to fulfill Daniel 9:25.
Only the decree of Artaxerxes officially authorized the restoration of the Hebrew civil order and
the right of Israel to govern herself according to the law of God (see, Ezra 7:25-26; also Nehemiah
8-13). And only the decree of Artaxerxes authorized the physical rebuilding of the city (review
pages 9-11 above). Below we will provide further corroborating evidence for this.

‘Unto the Messiah the Prince’

There is almost universal agreement among conservative Bible scholars that the Messiah the Prince
in verse 25 is Jesus Christ. There are four issues we wish to address in this section: First, what is
the meaning of the word ‘Messiah’? Second, which event marked the anointing of Jesus? Third,
in what season of the year was Jesus anointed? Finally, is the Prince of verse 26 the same person
as the Messiah the Prince of verse 25??
The word ‘messiah’ is relatively common in the Old Testament. It means, ‘to anoint’ or ‘to smear.’
It is used, for example, to describe the act of anointing David (I Samuel 16:13) Significantly,
David received the Holy Spirit at the same moment that he was anointed) and Aaron (Exodus
29:7), among others. The emphasis in Daniel 9:25, however, is not on the act of anointing but
rather on the person who is anointed. The phrase can be translated ‘unto the Anointed One, the
Prince.’
An examination of the Biblical testimony clearly reveals that Jesus was anointed at the moment of
His baptism. Let us examine the evidence from John’s Gospel first. In John 1:19 we are informed
that a group of Pharisees were sent to John with the purpose of asking him who he was. John was
quick in his response: ‘I am not the Christ.’ It would be well to remember that the word ‘Christ’
in Greek (we still use the word ‘christened’ to refer to an anointing) means the same thing as the
word ‘Messiah’ in Hebrew. In other words, John the Baptist was saying: ‘I am not the Messiah.’
A little later in the chapter we are told that John baptized Jesus and introduced Him as the Lamb
of God (John 1:29). At the moment of the baptism the Holy Spirit fell upon Jesus (John 1:32-33).
And just a short while later, Andrew told his brother Simon Peter: ‘We have found the Messias,
which is, being interpreted, the Christ.’ (John 1:41). And the following day, Nathanael said to
Jesus: ‘thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.’ (John 1:49)
The gospel of Mark adds details which are not found in John. Mark 1:9-11 describes the baptism
of Jesus. We are told that as He came up out of the water, the Holy Spirit fell upon Him. After
being tempted of the devil, Jesus then began His public ministry in Galilee (Mark 1:14) with the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 335 of 369
words: ‘The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye and believe the gospel.’
(Mark 1:15; see also, Galatians 4:4). To which time prophecy was Jesus referring when He said,
‘The time is fulfilled?’ The only Old Testament prophecy which pinpoints the precise time for the
beginning of Christ’s ministry is the prophecy of the seventy weeks.
The same scenario is found in Luke. There we are told that Jesus was anointed with the Holy Spirit
at the moment of His baptism. Next He went to the wilderness to be tempted (Luke 4:1-13) Finally
He returned to Galilee ‘in the power of the Spirit’ (Luke 4:14) to officially begin His public
ministry. Significantly, he began His preaching in the synagogue of Nazareth with the words: ‘The
Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He hath anointed me to preach the gospel. . .’ (Luke 4:18).
In the light of Luke’s testimony, can there be any doubt that Jesus was anointed by the Holy Spirit
at His baptism?
In Acts 10:37, 38 we are distinctly told that Jesus was anointed with the Holy Spirit. As we have
seen previously, the Holy Spirit fell upon Jesus at the moment of His baptism. Notice the words
of Peter on the day of Pentecost:
‘That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee,
after the baptism which John preached; How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost
and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for
God was with him.’
Furthermore, we are told in Daniel 9 that the seventy weeks were cut off specifically for the Jewish
nation. This is the reason why Jesus told His disciples: ‘Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and
into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’
(Matthew 10:5-6). Before the seventy weeks came to an end, the mission of Jesus as Messiah was
confined to Israel.

As to the date of Messiah’s anointing, Luke 3:1-2 provides many chronological clues:

“Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate [26—36 AD] being
governor of Judaea, and Herod [Antipas: 4 BC—39 AD] being tetrarch in Galilee, and his brother
Philip [4 BC—33/34 AD] tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias [dates
not known] the tetrarch of Abilene, Annas [6-14 AD] and Caiphas being high priests, the Word of
God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.”

The prophecy of the 70 weeks specifies that Messiah was to come ‘seven weeks and threescore
and two weeks’ after the decree of Artaxerxes. Beginning in 457 BC and going forward 483 years
we arrive at 27 AD as the date for the manifestation of the Messiah (remember that there is no year
“0" so only one year transpires between 1 BC and 1 AD). We know that Christ was cut off or killed
in the middle of the last week, at springtime (Passover). This must mean that Messiah was
manifested to Israel three and a half years earlier, in the fall (incidentally, this also means that
Artaxerxes’ decree was given in the fall).

Notice that the Messiah is also called the Prince. No serious Bible scholar questions the fact that
the Prince of verse 25 is the same person as the Messiah. This same person is called ‘the Prince of
the Host’ in Daniel 8:11 (see Joshua 5:13-15 for the only other occurrence of this title in the Old
Testament), the ‘Prince of the Covenant’ in Daniel 11:22, and ‘Michael that Great Prince’ in Daniel

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 336 of 369
12:1. There can be no doubt that this title belongs to Jesus. In the great messianic prophecy of
Isaiah 9:6 Jesus is called ‘the Prince of Peace.’ And Peter calls Jesus ‘Prince’ twice in the book of
Acts (Acts 3:15; 5:31)

‘Seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks’

Why does Gabriel refer to this period as ‘seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks’ when he
could have simply said, ‘sixty-nine weeks’? In other words, why did he separate the seven weeks
from the other sixty-two weeks? As we look at the literary structure (see page 5) the answer
becomes obvious. The seven weeks have to do with the city and people at the beginning of the
seventy weeks, while the sixty-two weeks take us to the time of Messiah the Prince at the end of
the seventy weeks.

‘The street shall be built again’

There are several issues we must address under this heading, among them: What is the meaning of
‘street’ and ‘wall’? The differing translations of these words in our English versions suggests that
they are not easy to translate. Among the renditions are:
New International Version: ‘streets and trench’
Revised Standard Version: ‘squares and moat’
New American Standard: ‘plaza and moat’
New English Bible: ‘streets and conduits’
Jerusalem Bible: ‘squares and ramparts’
King James: ‘street and wall’
Let’s examine the meaning of the word ‘street’. The question suggests itself: What would be so
significant about the rebuilding of one street (in singular) in Jerusalem after the captivity? No
doubt there were many streets in Jerusalem after the rebuilding was finished. Why does Gabriel
refer to just one street being rebuilt in troublous times?

‘and the wall, even in troublous times’

The simple fact is that the Hebrew word rachab literally means ‘broaden, make room, broad
expanse and broad roomy place.’ The word simply means ‘a broad, open space in a town or
village.’ The evidence from the Old Testament seems to indicate that it could just as well have
been translated ‘town square’ or ‘plaza.’
The first time this word is used in the Bible is Genesis 19:2. In this text, Lot invited two angels to
lodge in his house for the night but one of the angels replied: ‘Nay, but we will abide in the street
all night.’ In Deuteronomy 13:16 Moses told the Israelites that when they conquered a city, they
were to ‘gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof’ and to ‘burn with fire the city,
and all the spoil thereof every whit. . .’ Here the town plaza would seem to fit far better than a
particular street. In Esther 4:6 we are informed that the street of the city was in front of the king’s
gate and in Esther 6:9, 11 we are told that Mordeccai was paraded through the street of the city on
the king’s horse and in royal apparel. Once again, the town square seems to be a more likely place
for this to occur than on a singular street.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 337 of 369
There are two references in 2 Chronicles which bear a direct relationship to our study. In 2
Chronicles 29:4 we are told that Hezekiah gathered the priests and Levites in the east street to give
them special instructions. II Chronicles 32:6 explains that Hezekiah ‘set captains of war over the
people, and gathered them together to him in the street of the gate of the city.’ We see here military
leaders gathering in the town square for a pep talk. Once again, in both of these texts from
Chronicles, the town square is a more likely meeting place than the street.
But the two references which are of signal interest are found in Ezra and Nehemiah, the very books
which describe the restoring and building of Jerusalem after the captivity. Ezra 10:9-10 describes
a general assembly of the people of Jerusalem at the street to receive instructions on the danger of
mixed marriages. It is inconceivable that everyone in the city was able to gather in one particular
street. It is more likely that they gathered at the town square. In Nehemiah 8:1-3 we are told that
as soon as the wall of the city was finished, the whole city gathered ‘as one man into the street
that was before the water gate; and they spake unto Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the Law
of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel.’ Here in the street, the covenant between
God and Israel was renewed. The theocracy was officially restored by the reading of the Book of
the Covenant.
Having lived in Latin America, I can understand the critical importance of the town square or
plaza. Even though modernization has diluted many traditions, small towns can still be found
where official proclamations are made at the plaza or town square. It is there that city hall is found.
The town cathedral is there. It is there that parades begin and end. It is there that people gather for
social events and to hear civic announcements. In the past, even judicial decisions were reached
there. In short, the city square is the center of public civil, social and religious life.
What Daniel 9:25 is telling us, then, is that the town square was rebuilt in order to facilitate the
establishment of social, political and religious life. This is precisely what is contemplated in the
command to ‘restore’ Jerusalem. By rebuilding the town square, God’s people were able to use it
once again for civil and religious governance.
What about the word ‘wall’? As we have seen, this word is variously translated in modern versions
as, ‘wall,’ ‘trench,’ ‘moat,’ ‘rampart,’ and ‘conduit.’ But is this what the word really means?
The Hebrew word harus literally means ‘to cut,’ ‘to sharpen,’ or ‘to decide.’ Except for Daniel
9:25 the word is never translated ‘wall.’ Why, then, is the word translated ‘wall’ in this solitary
instance? It seems there are two reasons. First of all, the building of the wall by Nehemiah after
the captivity seems to have influenced the translators. Secondly, the LXX translates the Hebrew
harus with teichos which clearly means ‘wall’ in Greek. And Jerome’s Latin Vulgate picked up
on the Greek translation by rendering the word muri (‘walls’). Notice that Jerome changed the
Hebrew singular to a plural to better fit the work of Nehemiah.

Let’s take a closer look at the meaning of the word in the Old Testament. In I Kings 20:40 king
Ahab tells a certain prophet: ‘So shall thy judgment be; thyself hast decided (harus) it.’ Here the
word harus is properly translated ‘decided’. Significant is the fact that the concept of decision is
coupled with the idea of judgment. In Job 14:5, the patriarch tells us how man’s existence is under
God’s control: ‘his days are determined (harus), the number of his months are with thee, thou hast
appointed his bounds that he cannot pass.’ The idea here is that God decides how long man shall
live. In Isaiah 10:22, 23 God promised Israel that a remnant of Israel would return after the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 338 of 369
captivity. This had been ‘decreed’ (harus) or ‘determined’ (harus) beforehand. In Isaiah 28:22 we
are told that God had ‘determined’ (harus) a consumption upon the whole earth. Again, God makes
a decision before it is implemented. In Joel 3:14 we are told that the nations are gathered in the
Valley of Jehoshaphat and there God will make His decision regarding them. The decision is
clearly linked with the idea of judgment (Joel 3:9-13).
Significantly, the word harus is used in two other places in Daniel 9, and in both the basic idea is
that of an execution of a judgment which had previously been decreed or decided by God. In verse
26 we are told that the desolations of Jerusalem had previously been determined, a thought which
is repeated in verse 27. The key question is: Why is harus translated ‘wall’ in verse 25 while it is
translated ‘determined’ in verses 26 and 27? Would it not be more consistent to translate it
‘decision’ in all three instances? In short: Why is the word harus translated ‘wall’ only in this one
instance?
The simple answer to this question is that the word ‘decision’ does not seem to fit in verse 25.
What sense can be made out of a translation which reads: ‘the decision shall be built again?’ How
can a decision be built again? In order to answer this question, we must ask another: What does
the town square have to do with the making of decisions? That is to say, if the expression ‘the
street shall be built again, and the wall’ should be translated ‘the square shall be built again and
the decision,’ how does the building of the square relate to the ability to make decisions? The
answer to this question is found in the fact that the city gate which led to the square was the place
where judicial, military, civic and religious decisions were made. In order for decisions to be made
at the gate of the square, the square had to be rebuilt. Let’s notice several texts on the importance
of the gate of the square.
The book of Lamentations describes the aftermath of Jerusalem’s destruction by Nebuchadnezzar.
One of the results was that the elders had ‘ceased from the gate,’ where they were accustomed to
meet to counsel the people and to render judicial decisions (Lamentations 5:14). We know that
in antiquity every city had a council of elders whose task was to hear cases which were brought
before them at the gate of the town square. We find an example of this in Jeremiah 26:8-24 where
we are told that the trial of Jeremiah took place ‘in the entry of the new gate of the Lord’s house’
where the princes of Judah had gathered to render their decision (verse 10).
In II Samuel 15:1-3 we are told the fascinating story of how Absalom, David’s son, ‘rose up early,
and stood beside the way of the gate; and it was so, that when any man that had a controversy
came to the king for judgment, then Absalom called unto him, and said: ‘Of what city art thou,’
and he said: ‘Thy servant is of one of the tribes of Israel.’ And Absalom said unto him: ‘See, thy
matters are good and right; but there is no man deputed of the king to hear thee.’” (Verses 2-3)
Significant here is the fact that Absalom usurped the king’s position at the gate to render judicial
decisions.
In the days of Amos, we are told that the judges had become so corrupt that they had turned
‘judgment to wormwood’ and left ‘off righteousness in the earth.’ (Amos 5:7). This total lack of
justice was reflected in the fact that the judges afflicted the just and took bribes and turned ‘aside
the poor in the gate from their right’ (Amos 5:12). Once again we find that justice was to be
dispensed at the gate.
As we have already noted, immediately after the wall was finished in the days of Nehemiah, the
people ‘gathered themselves together as one man into the street [city square?] that was before the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 339 of 369
water gate’ (Nehemiah 8:13). There Nehemiah renewed the Covenant and the theocracy was
restored. Among other things, the Book of the Law was read, the benevolent acts of God were
recited, the Feast of Tabernacles was kept, the Levitical priesthood was reorganized, and the laws
of marriage, tithing and Sabbath observance were renewed. Even a cursory reading of Nehemiah
8-13 reveals that Israel was reestablishing self-governance according to the laws of God at the
water gate in the street [city square].

Let us summarize, then, the meaning of Daniel 9:25:

The decree in this verse must meet two specifications: It must be a decree to restore and build
Jerusalem. While the restoration refers primarily to the reestablishment of self-governance in
harmony with the laws of the theocracy, the building has to do with the actual reconstruction of
the physical city: Its walls, its gates, its city square, etc.
The physical rebuilding of the city square (rachab) is of prime importance because there judicial,
religious, civic and military decisions will be made in the reestablished theocracy. This is the
reason why the square (rachab) and decision making (harus) are paired together in Daniel 9:25.
Because the KJV translators mistranslated the word rachab (as ‘street’), they also mistranslated
the word harus (as ‘wall’). Once we realize that rachab means the ‘city square’ and harus means
‘the ability to make decisions,’ the sense of Daniel 9:25 becomes crystal clear!
Especially significant is the fact that Artaxerxes’ decree of 457 B. C. gave Israel the right to appoint
judges and magistrates and to decide cases which were brought to them in harmony with the laws
of God (see, Ezra 7:25-26).
The ‘troublous times’ were due to the fact that the Samaritans and other people of the land did not
want Israel to rebuild the city and reestablish self-governance. They did all in their power to
prevent the rebuilding and restoration, even to the point of accusing Israel of sedition against the
Persian government. The period between 457 and 408 B.C. can certainly be described as ‘troublous
times.’

‘after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself’

All the events we have described in the previous section take place within the time frame of the
first 7 weeks (49 years). But then, 62 weeks (434 years) later, the Messiah was to be cut off. What
is meant by the ‘cutting off’ of the Messiah? And for whom was he cut off? The clearest answer
to these questions is found in the parallel messianic prophecy of Isaiah 53. There are several
parallel terms in Daniel 9 and Isaiah 53 among which are the following:
Transgression (Daniel 9:24; Isaiah 53:5, 8)
Sin (Daniel 9:5, 8, 11, 15, 20, 24; Isaiah 53:12)
Iniquity (Daniel 9:24; Isaiah 53:5, 6)
People (Daniel 9:6, 24, 26; Isaiah 53:8)
Righteousness (Daniel 9:7, 14, 18, 24; Isaiah 53:11)
Cut off (Daniel 9:26; Isaiah 53:8)

More specifically, let’s notice verse 8: ‘He [the suffering servant] was taken from prison and from
judgment: and who shall declare his generation? For he was cut off [notice that in Daniel and

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 340 of 369
Isaiah the verb is passive which means that someone else cut him off] out of the land of the living:
for the transgression of my people was he stricken.’ It is clear here that the expression ‘cut off’
means killed. And the prophecy makes it clear that he did this for his people and not for himself.
This second fact is underlined in several other verses of Isaiah 53 as well: ‘he hath borne our griefs
and carried our sorrows,’ ‘he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our
iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed,’ ‘the
LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all,’ ‘he shall bear their iniquities,’ ‘he was numbered
with transgressors and he bare the sin of many’ (verses 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12). Isaiah 53 makes it
crystal clear that the Messiah would be killed and that his death would be vicarious.

‘And the people of the prince that shall come’

Who is this ‘prince who is to come’ and who are his people? There seem to be three main views:
1) The people are the Romans and the prince is Titus; 2) The prince is the future Antichrist and
the people will be his wicked followers; 3) The people are the Jews and the prince is Jesus Christ.
Which of these views is correct?
We will concern ourselves here only with options one and three because, as we shall see, when we
understand these, the second option takes care of itself. Historicists in general and Seventh-day
Adventists in particular, have traditionally taught that the prince was Titus and the people of the
prince were the Romans who attacked and destroyed Jerusalem in the year 70 A. D. Though this
view is tempting, it does not really fit the literary structure of Daniel 9:24-27. Notice the following
structural consideration:

Messiah (verse 25) Prince

+ +
Messiah (verse 26) Prince

There is no reason to believe that the Messiah the Prince of verse 25 is not the same Messiah and
Prince of verse 26. In fact, the reference to Messiah and Prince in verse 26 provides a literary
balance with the reference to Messiah the Prince in verse 25.
Another problem with the view that the prince is Titus and the people are the Romans is the fact
that it is incongruous with the three personal pronouns in verse 27. In verse 27 we are told: ‘And
he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the midst of the week he shall cause
the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make
it desolate. . .’ The context clearly indicates that the three ‘he’s of verse 27 refer to the same
person as the ‘he’ of verse 26. In other words, the prince of the people of verse 26 is the same
person who confirms the covenant for one week causes the sacrifice and oblation to cease and
makes the city and sanctuary desolate.
It is true that Titus literally caused the sacrificial system to come to an end when he and his armies
destroyed the Jerusalem temple. But it is not true that Titus made a strong covenant with Israel
for one week. Seventh-day Adventists have traditionally believed that it was Jesus who brought
the sacrificial system to an end when he died on the cross (as we shall see later, this view is
corroborated by Matthew 27:51 as well as the book of Hebrews). Seventh-day Adventists have
also believed that Jesus confirmed the covenant with Israel for one week, that is, during the last of
the seventy weeks. It is clear that the antecedent to all three ‘he’s’ in verse 27 is the prince of verse

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 341 of 369
26. Let us put it this way: ‘the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the
sanctuary . . . and he [the prince] shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the
midst of the week he [the prince] shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and for the
overspreading of abominations he [the prince] shall make desolate. . . .’
Of course, if the prince of verse 26 is Jesus, then the people of the prince must be the Jews
(remember that the word ‘people’ throughout Daniel 9 always denotes Israel—see verses 15, 16,
19, 20, 24). The ten-thousand-dollar question then becomes: Did the Jews destroy their own city
and sanctuary? At first sight this possibility would seem absurd. The Jews did not destroy their
own city and sanctuary (Titus and the Romans did!!), or did they? In order to answer this question,
we must take a look at the reason for the first destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar.

Who destroyed Jerusalem the first time? Was it God or Nebuchadnezzar or Israel? Daniel 9:14
explicitly states that God destroyed Jerusalem. II Chronicles 36:17-20 states that
Nebuchadnezzar (whom God calls ‘my servant’ in Jeremiah 27:6) destroyed the city and the
temple. But Daniel 9:11, 14, 15 explains that Israel’s sins brought about the destruction of the
city and the temple. In fact, the prophet Jeremiah told Israel: If you do not submit to the king of
Babylon ‘thou shalt cause this city to be burned with fire.’ (Jeremiah 38:23; notice also verses
17-18). We can put it this way: Because of Israel’s sins, God employed His servant
Nebuchadnezzar to destroy the city and the temple. But God would not have used Nebuchadnezzar
to destroy had it not been for the sins of the people. In other words, Israel, because of her own
sinful choices, brought destruction upon herself. Now let’s take a look at the second destruction of
Jerusalem.
One thing becomes absolutely clear in Daniel 9 and it is this: The destiny of Jerusalem is
inseparably linked with what happened to Messiah the Prince. Twice in the literary structure what
happened to the Messiah is followed by the destruction of Jerusalem. In verse 26, after Messiah
was cut off, Jerusalem was destroyed. And in verse 27, Jerusalem was destroyed after the Prince
caused the sacrifice and oblation to cease! The critical question at this juncture is, does the New
Testament shed any light on how the destiny of the Messiah is linked to the fate of the second city
and temple? The answer is a resounding yes!
On the Sunday before the crucifixion, Jesus entered Jerusalem triumphantly on a donkey. At the
conclusion of this majestic event, Jesus entered the temple and cast out the money changers. At
this point the temple was referred to by Matthew as the ‘temple of God’ and Jesus called it ‘My
house’ (Matthew 21:12-13). Jesus then told a series of parables in which He underlined that the
Jewish nation was about to make the terrible mistake of rejecting him (see, for example, Matthew
21:33-45; 22:1-14; 23:29-39).
Of particular significance is the parable of Matthew 21:33-44 where Jesus reviewed the history of
Israel in five stages:
Stage #1: God sent servants to Israel to gather fruit in harvest season but Israel rejected God’s
messengers (verses 34-35).
Stage #2: God then sent more servants and Israel did the same with them (verse 36).
Stage #3: God then sent them His Own Son and they killed Him (verses 37-39).
Stage #4: The wicked men who killed the Son were destroyed (verse 41).
Stage #5: The kingdom was taken from Israel and given to the Gentiles (verse 43; Acts 13:46-47).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 342 of 369
These five stages of Israel’s history as described in Matthew 21:33-44 parallel very closely the
same stages of Israel’s history as described in Daniel 9:

Stage #1:
After God released Israel from Egypt, he sent them messengers but they mocked and rejected them
(Daniel 9:6; II Chronicles 36:15, 16)
Stage #2:
After the Babylonian captivity, God gave Israel another chance. The city and temple were rebuilt
and God gave Israel another opportunity to bear fruit (Daniel 9:24). In order to help, God sent
Israel many messengers: Haggai, Zechariah, Zerubbabel, Joshua, Ezra, Nehemiah, Malachi, John
the Baptist, etc. But they rejected these messengers as well.
Stage #3:
At the very end of the seventy weeks, God even sent Messiah the Prince; but instead of receiving
Him, they cut Him off (Daniel 9:26).
Stage #4:
As a result, Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman armies (Daniel 9:26-27).
Stage #5:
The Gentiles now became God’s new nation (this is implicit in the fact that probation was to last
only 70 weeks for the Jewish nation. We shall also find that when Stephen was stoned, the
theocracy came to an end and the gospel went to the Gentiles).
The striking parallel between Daniel 9:26-27 and Matthew 21:33-44 clearly reveals that the
rejection of the Son by Israel resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem and the grafting in of the
Gentiles as God’s chosen nation. When Jesus left the temple He pronounced the ominous words:
‘Behold, your house is left unto you desolate’ (Matthew 23:38). Two words immediately arrest
our attention. First of all, the temple was no longer the ‘temple of God.’ Jesus now referred to it
as ‘your house.’ Secondly, notice the key word, ‘desolate.’ This is the very word which is used in
Daniel 9 to describe the fate of Jerusalem. Three times we are told there that Jerusalem would be
left desolate (verses 26, 27). Significantly, as soon as Jesus pronounced these chilling words, He
left the temple and spoke about the destruction of the city and the temple (Matthew 24:1-3).
Certainly no one can miss the connection between the rejection of the Messiah and the destruction
of Jerusalem! Only a willful and unexplainable blindness could fail to see how the rejection of
Messiah the Prince led to the destruction of the city and temple!!
This link can also be discerned in Luke 19:41-44: ‘And when he was come near, he beheld the city
and wept over it, saying: ‘If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which
belong unto thy peace! But now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee,
that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on
every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall
not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knowest not the time of thy visitation.’
Can there be any doubt in this passage that the fate of Jerusalem is linked with the rejection of the
Messiah? (For further information on the role the Jews played in the death of the Messiah, see,
Acts 3:14, 15; 7:52; Acts 2:22, 23).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 343 of 369
To end this section, I would like to make a few remarks about the parable of Matthew 22 because
it explains why Jerusalem was destroyed the second time. Like in the parable of Matthew 21:33-
46 God sent servants to Israel in order to prepare them for the marriage of his son (verses 2-3).
This stage represents the Old Testament period when God sent prophets to prepare Israel for the
coming of the Messiah. These messages were rejected. Then, after Christ was sacrificed (verse
4), further servants (Peter, Stephen, Paul, etc.) were sent to the same people (Israel) but these
messages were also rejected (verses 5-6). In verse 7 we are told the king’s reaction: ‘But when the
king heard thereof, he was wroth; and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers,
and burned up their city.’ Notice how three ideas coalesce in this verse. God used the Roman
armies (spoken of as his armies) to destroy those murderers and to burn their city. Once again we
clearly see that the people, by rejecting the Messiah, brought destruction upon their own city (see
also, Hosea 13:9). Though the destruction was carried out by God through the instrumentality of
Titus and the Roman armies, it was the choice of the Jewish nation which really determined its
fate. Ellen White concurs with this scenario:
“The Jews had forged their own fetters; they had filled for themselves the cup of vengeance. In
the utter destruction that befell them as a nation, and in all the woes that followed them in their
dispersion, they were but reaping the harvest which their own hands had sown. Says the prophet:
‘O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself;’ ‘for thou hast fallen by thine iniquity.’ Hosea 13:9; 14:1.
Their sufferings are often represented as a punishment visited upon them by the direct decree of
God. It is thus that the great deceiver seeks to conceal his own work. By stubborn rejection of
divine love and mercy, the Jews had caused the protection of God to be withdrawn from them,
and Satan was permitted to rule them according to his will.” The Great Controversy, pp. 35-36
We must now make a few remarks about the phrase, ‘the prince that shall come.’ The question
suggests itself: When, in the chronology of the 70 weeks, was this prince to come? The context
clearly indicates that he was to come at the conclusion of the first 69 weeks. Both futurists and
historicists agree on this point. But while historicists believe, as we have seen, that the prince that
shall come was fulfilled in Jesus or Titus, futurists teach that the prince will be a future world
dictator. Which view is correct?
Once again, as in the case of the vicarious death of the Messiah, the key which unlocks the true
meaning of this phrase is found in a messianic prophecy, Psalm 118. Psalm 118:26 reads: ‘Blessed
is he that cometh in the name of the Lord: we have blessed you out of the house of the Lord.’
In Luke 13:35 Jesus applied to Himself (at His second coming) the phrase, ‘blessed is he that
cometh in the name of the Lord.’ But this messianic prophecy was also fulfilled at triumphal entry
into Jerusalem. Notice how Luke 19:37-44 outlines three events in their precise chronological
sequence:
Jesus entered Jerusalem on a colt, and the multitudes sang: ‘Blessed be the King that cometh in
the name of the Lord. . .’ (Verses 37-38).

Jesus then spoke about his rejection by the Jewish nation (verses 39-42; see also Matthew 23:29-
39).

Finally, Jesus spoke about the ensuing destruction of Jerusalem (verses 43-44; see also Matthew
24:1-3).

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 344 of 369
One cannot help but notice how this same threefold sequence is found in Daniel 9:26:

The prince comes.

He is cut off.
The city and temple are destroyed.
Psalm 118:22 makes it abundantly clear that the one who comes in the name of the Lord is also
‘the stone which the builders refused [and] is become the head of the corner.’ Jesus identified
Himself as this Stone (see Matthew 21:42 and the context in which it appears). Thus, after
announcing that not one stone would be left upon another in the literal Jerusalem temple, Jesus
affirmed that He was about to become the head cornerstone of a new spiritual temple, the church
(see also, Ephesians 2:19-22). It is worthy of note that the word ‘head’ in the Old Testament is
used interchangeably with the word ‘prince’ (Isaiah 19:13; Judges 20:2 and 1 Samuel 14:38
where the word pinnah (head) is used in the sense of ‘chief, ruler or leader’).

‘Shall destroy the city and the sanctuary’

The temple, which had been rebuilt as a result of the decrees of Cyrus the Great and Darius the
Persian, and the city, which had been restored and rebuilt as a result of the decrees of Artaxerxes,
were to be destroyed once again due to the unfaithfulness of the people in rejecting the Messiah:
‘The end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined’
The word ‘thereof’ has the city and the sanctuary as antecedents. That is, the end of the city and
the sanctuary would be with a flood. In the Bible, a military invasion is occasionally compared to
an overwhelming flood (see Isaiah 8:7-8; Jeremiah 46:6-7; Revelation 12:15-16; Daniel 11:22,
40; Revelation 16:12 compared with Revelation 17:1-5, 15). We have here a vivid description of
the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple by Titus and the Roman armies. Anyone who has read
Josephus’ description of the destruction of Jerusalem in Wars of the Jews (notice that this event
is called ‘the war’ in Daniel 9:26) will concur that the invasion of Jerusalem by the Roman armies
was as an overwhelming and devastating flood. A vivid description of the destruction of Jerusalem
is given by Ellen G. White in the first chapter of The Great Controversy.
Significant is the word ‘desolations’. One is reminded of the words of Jesus to the Jewish leaders:
‘Behold, your house is left unto you desolate’ (Matthew 23:38) immediately after which Jesus
spoke of the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple (Matthew 24:1-3). We shall have occasion
to say more about this word when we study the last half of Daniel 9:27.

It is of the utmost importance to realize that even though the destruction of Jerusalem falls outside
the chronological time period of the seventy weeks (because the seventy weeks ended in the year
34 A. D. but Jerusalem was not destroyed until the year 70 A. D.) yet it is inseparably linked with
events which occurred within that time period. This is reflected in the last phrase of Daniel 9:26
(as well as in the last phrase of Daniel 9:27): ‘desolations are determined.’ As we have previously
noted, the word ‘determined’ refers to an event which has been decreed or decided before it
actually occurs. That is to say, the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple had already been
determined by events which took place during the time frame of the seventy weeks—particularly
the last week!

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 345 of 369
‘And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week’

Several questions must be asked at this point. Who is the ‘he’ in this verse? What does the word
‘confirm’ mean and which ‘covenant’ is being spoken of? Who are the ‘many’ with whom the
covenant is confirmed? Is this week the last of the seventy?
The entire meaning of verse 27 revolves around the identity of the person who confirms the
covenant for one week. The all-important question therefore becomes, who is this person?
Futurists believe this person is a future Roman Antichrist who will make a seven-year pact of peace
with the literal Jews only to break it in the middle of the week. According to this view, this vile
person will halt the sacrificial system in a rebuilt Jerusalem temple and impose a reign of terror
for three and a half literal years.
There are ample reasons, however, to believe that this person is the same as the Messiah who was
cut off in verse 26. There is no contextual or syntactical reason to insert the Antichrist into this
verse. As we have seen in our discussion above, Jesus Christ fits this prophecy perfectly. This will
become even clearer as we answer the other questions at the beginning of this section.
What does the expression ‘he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week’ mean? It is a
matter of record that every single time the word ‘covenant’ is used in the book of Daniel, it refers
to God’s covenant with His people. In other words, the word ‘covenant’ in Daniel is never
employed to describe a secular political covenant. For instance, Daniel 9:4 speaks of God who
keeps ‘the covenant and mercy to them that love him’; Daniel 11:22 refers to Jesus as ‘the prince
of the covenant’ [notice how prince and covenant are linked in this verse just like in Daniel 9:27];
Daniel 11:28, 30 speaks of the ‘holy covenant;’ and Daniel 11:32 describes those who ‘do wickedly
against the covenant.’ It should be noted that the word covenant in Daniel 9:27 has the definite
article. In other words, it is not a covenant but the covenant which is confirmed. Significant also
is the fact that Daniel 9 is the only chapter where the covenant name ‘Yahweh’ appears. This name
is God’s covenant name throughout the Old Testament.
The expression ‘he shall confirm the covenant’ is better translated ‘he shall make strong the
covenant.’ The Hebrew word gabar is used some 328 times in the Old Testament and the basic
meaning is ‘strong,’ ‘mighty’ (for example, in Isaiah 9:6 gabar is translated ‘mighty’) The sense
here seems to be the act of putting the covenant on a firm footing or ratifying it. The question is:
Why did the covenant need to be made strong? Was it weak in the first place?
The answer to these queries lies in the fact that the old covenant was ratified with the blood of
animals which could not take away sin. On the other hand, the new covenant is better and stronger
because it is based on better blood, a better priesthood, a better covenant, better promises, better
sacrifice and a better sanctuary. The old covenant could not truly remove sin but the new covenant
does (see, John 1:29; Hebrews 7:22; 8:6, 13; 9:12-27; 10:1-4). That is to say, the old covenant
was weak because it could not legally save because ‘the blood of bulls and goats cannot remove
sin’. The function of the old covenant was to reveal the Savior who was to come.
And who are the ‘many’ with whom this covenant is made strong? In our analysis of verse 26 we
saw that the ‘cutting off’ of the Messiah was a vicarious sacrifice. This fact is underlined also in
the meaning of the word ‘many’. In the parallel messianic passage of Isaiah 53 we find the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 346 of 369
following declaration: ‘by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear
their iniquities.’ This prophecy is picked up in the New Testament as well.
In Mark 10:45 we are told that Jesus came ‘not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give
his life a ransom for many.’ Once again the word ‘many’ is linked with the idea of a vicarious
sacrifice. In Hebrews 9:28 we find the same idea: ‘So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of
many. . . .’ But by far the most important verse for our understanding of the word ‘many’ is found
in Matthew 26:28 (see also, I Corinthians 11:25). When Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper in the
Upper Room to commemorate His death until He comes, He stated: ‘this is the blood of the new
testament [the word ‘testament’ here is the Greek word which is also translated ‘covenant’ in the
New Testament—diatheke], which is shed for many for the remission of sins.’
All of the above texts are linked by a common idea: A vicarious sacrifice for ‘many.’ It can hardly
be coincidental that the statement in Daniel 9:26 to the effect that the Messiah was cut off but not
for himself was picked up by three New Testament writers and applied to Jesus! And the fact that
Jesus Himself, in Matthew 26:28 not only connected His vicarious sacrifice with the word ‘many’
but also with the word ‘covenant’ is compelling evidence that the New Testament holds the key
which unlocks the meaning of the prophecy of the seventy weeks.
We must now move on to one final consideration in this section: To which ‘week’ is Gabriel
referring when he states: ‘And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week’? The context
makes it very clear that this is the last week of the seventy. No scholar I know of has questioned
this. Yet an important fact has escaped many commentators and that is that the chronological
progression of Messiah’s career is repeated in chiastic fashion twice in Daniel 9:25-27 ending each
time with the destruction of Jerusalem. Notice the progression in verses 25-26:

A. Anointing of the Messiah begins 70th week

B. Messiah ‘cut off’ (at some unspecified point during the 70th week)
C. Messiah’s death leads to Jerusalem’s destruction in 70 A. D.

A similar sequence of events is repeated in verse 27:

A. Messiah makes the covenant strong for 70th week

B. Messiah causes the sacrifice to cease in the middle of the 70th week
C. Jerusalem destroyed because Messiah was killed in the middle
of the week
A comparison of the structure of verses 25-26 with verse 27 reveals that verses 25-27 cannot be
read in a linear fashion as if one event followed the other in a neat chronological sequence. The
fact is that the same material is repeated twice in chiastic fashion. The ‘A’ in verse 25 pinpoints
the date for the initiation of Messiah’s ministry during the 70th week while the ‘A’ in verse 27
emphasizes that Messiah made strong the covenant during the 70th week. The ‘B’ in verse 26
describes the death of the Messiah at some point during the 70th week but does not specify the
exact time. The corresponding ‘B’ in verse 27 pinpoints the precise time of Messiah’s deathBit
was in the middle of the 70th week. The ‘C’ of verse 26 describes the destruction of Jerusalem as
does the ‘C’ of verse 27. This beautiful literary symmetry is further evidence that the Messiah the
Prince of verse 25 is the same person as the Messiah and the Prince of verse 26.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 347 of 369
‘And in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the
oblation to cease’
This sentence answers three questions: Question: What was to cease? Answer: The sacrifice and
the oblation. Question: Who was to cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease? Answer: The
prince. Question: When were they to cease? Answer: In the middle of the last week.
First of all, what is meant by the expression ‘the sacrifice and the oblation’? The word ‘sacrifice’
(zebach) is a common one in the Old Testament and is used to describe the animal sacrifices
performed in the sanctuary (Leviticus 7:11-20, etc.). The word ‘oblation’ (minchah) is used to
describe the drink and meal offerings which accompanied these sacrifices (Numbers 28:5, 7, etc).
Notice that it was the prince (who is the subject of the sentence) who caused the sacrifice and the
oblation to cease. The literary structure of Daniel 9:25-27 clearly indicates that the cutting off of
the Messiah would lead to the cessation of the sacrifice and the oblation. Synonyms for ‘cease’
are, ‘bring to an end,’ ‘stop,’ and ‘discontinue.’ Thus Daniel 9 not only explains that the prince
would cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease but it also tells us how this would happen:
The Messiah would be cut off from the land of the living! The Gospels strikingly reveal how
Daniel 9:25-27 was fulfilled in Jesus. Let’s see.
In John 19:30 we are told that the last words of Jesus on the cross were: ‘It is finished.’ As soon
as these words were pronounced, Matthew explains that ‘the veil of the temple was rent in twain
from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks were rent.’ (Matthew 27:51).
Not only was the veil torn from top to bottom, but something else happened which has profound
significance. Ellen White vividly describes what happened at the very moment the priest was about
to offer the sacrifice and the oblation:
“When the loud cry, ‘It is finished,’ came from the lips of Christ, the priests were officiating in
the temple. It was the hour of the evening sacrifice. The lamb representing Christ had been brought
to be slain. Clothed in his significant and beautiful dress, the priest stood with lifted knife, as did
Abraham when he was about to slay his son. With intense interest the people were looking on. But
the earth trembles and quakes; for the Lord Himself draws near. With a rending noise the inner
veil of the temple is torn from top to bottom by an unseen hand, throwing open to the gaze of the
multitude a place once filled with the presence of God. In this place the Shekinah had dwelt. . . .
“All is terror and confusion. The priest is about to slay the victim; but the knife drops from his
nerveless hand, and the lamb escapes. Type has met antitype in the death of God’s Son. The great
sacrifice has been made. The way into the holiest is laid open. A new and living way is prepared
for all. No longer need sinful, sorrowing humanity await the coming of the high priest. Henceforth
the Savior was to officiate as priest and advocate in the heaven of heavens.” The Desire of Ages,
pp. 756-757, emphasis supplied
Notice that there was no sacrifice or oblation the day Jesus died. Christ literally made these
ceremonies cease on the day of His crucifixion!! If the Jews had understood what this meant, they
would have shut down the sacrifices and the oblations on that very day once and for all! So, in
three ways God indicated that the sacrifice and the oblation had come to an end: 1) By Jesus crying
out: ‘It is finished,’ 2) By the rending of the veil, 3) By the lamb’s escape from the hands of the
priest.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 348 of 369
Yes, someone might object, but the sacrifices and oblations were resumed shortly thereafter and
continued until the destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70. True enough. But these ceremonies no
longer had any significance. The shadows had given way to the substance (see, Colossians 2:14-
17; Hebrews 10:1-9, 11-12, 18).
Notice that the prince caused the sacrifice and the oblation to cease in the middle of the 70th week.
This would be three and one half years after Messiah’s baptism. Now, if we can determine in
which season of the year the death of the Messiah took place, then we will also be able to specify
in which season Messiah was baptized and also in which season the 70th week ended. We know
for a fact that Jesus was crucified during the Passover season in the spring of the year (I
Corinthians 5:7-8). But if he was crucified in the spring of the year 31, then he must have been
baptized in the fall of the year 27, three and one half years earlier. This also means that probation
must have closed for the Jewish nation in the fall of the year 34. Furthermore, Artaxerxes’ decree
must also have been given in the fall. Thus when we have the central pillar of the 70th week in the
proper place all the other dates also fall into line.

‘And for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate,

even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured out
upon the desolate’
It must be noted that the prince is still the subject. It is the prince who makes Jerusalem desolate.
But didn’t we say above that the Jews destroyed their own city and temple? Yes, but as we saw in
Jeremiah, God destroyed Jerusalem by the people’s choice.
We are now told what would happen as a result of the death of the Messiah: Jerusalem was to be
destroyed. The word ‘overspreading’ is often translated ‘wings’ in the Old Testament. It is used,
for example, to describe the invasion of Assyria into Israel (Isaiah 8:7-8). The picture is of a river
which is at flood stage. When the river goes over its banks, it spreads out its wings (see also,
Nahum 1:8).
The word ‘abominations’ here merits special attention because of its connection with Matthew
24:15 and Luke 21:20. In Matthew 24:15-16 Jesus warned His disciples: ‘When ye therefore shall
see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place,
(whoso readeth, let him understand), then let them which be in Judaea flee to the mountains. . . .’
Extremely important here is the appeal Jesus made to the prophecy of Daniel 9:26-27. He explicitly
tells us that the abomination of desolation was spoken of by Daniel the prophet.
And what was this abomination of desolation? First let’s talk about the abomination. When the
Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem, they put their standards into the ground and worshiped them.
The Roman standards had an eagle surrounded by a golden wreath. Under the eagle and the wreath
was a solar disk, which represented the sun-god Mithra. Says Josephus about the order in which
the Roman armies marched:
“Then came the ensigns encompassing the eagle, which is at the head of every Roman legion, the
king and the strongest of birds, which seems to them a signal of domination, and an omen that they
shall conquer all against whom they march.” Wars of the Jews, 3:6:2

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 349 of 369
Ellen White echoes the view of Josephus:
“When the idolatrous standards of the Romans should be set up in the holy ground, which extended
some furlongs outside the city walls, then the followers of Christ were to find safety in flight.” The
Great Controversy, p. 21

Both Josephus (Wars of the Jews 2:19:7: ‘. . . . without having received any disgrace, he [Cestius]
retired from the city, without any reason in the world.’) and Ellen White, (The Great
Controversy, p. 30: ‘After the Romans under Cestius had surrounded the city, they unexpectedly
abandoned the siege when everything seemed favorable for an immediate attack.’) explain that
when Cestius unexpectedly withdrew the Roman armies, the Christians within the city saw this as
a sign to flee, and as a result, ‘not one Christian perished in the destruction of Jerusalem.’ (The
Great Controversy, p. 30) Luke 21:20, in unequivocal language, offers an explanation of what
the abomination was: ‘And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed by armies. . . .’ A comparison
of Matthew 24:15 and Luke 21:20 clearly indicate that the abomination consisted in the incursion
of the Roman armies onto the holy ground which surrounded Jerusalem.
But what is meant by the word ‘desolation’? It is noteworthy that Daniel 9:27 employs the word
‘desolate’ two times. Jesus picked up on this when he said to the Jewish leaders as He left the
temple: ‘Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.’ (Matthew 23:38). Luke 21:20 explains
that the abomination was an omen that the desolation of Jerusalem was near. In other words, the
best translation of Matthew 24:15 is: ‘When ye therefore shall see the abomination which maketh
desolate.’ That is to say, the abominable standards of the Romans were a sign that the desolation
of Jerusalem was at the doors.
As we compare Daniel 9:25-27 with the Gospels we can reach the following conclusions:
The abomination of desolation of Daniel 9:25-27 represents the destruction of Jerusalem by the
Roman armies in the year 70 A. D. This can be seen by the similarity in terminology between the
Gospels and Daniel 9:26-27 (Matthew 23:28; Luke 21:20 compared with Matthew 24:15).
The reason for the destruction of Jerusalem was the rejection of the Messiah by the Jewish nation.
This is true in Daniel 9:26-27 where twice the destruction of Jerusalem is spoken of as coming
after the death of the Messiah. It is also true in Luke 19:41-44 (as well as other passages) where
the destruction of Jerusalem is linked with the rejection of Jesus.
The expression ‘until the consummation’ means ‘until the full end’. We have already found this
word once before in verse 26. The root meaning of the Hebrew word kala (‘consummation’) means
‘to bring a process to completion’ or ‘to finish a process.’ This means that when Jerusalem was
destroyed, God was finished with the Jewish theocracy. Coupled with this idea of consummation
is the expression poured out. The question is what was poured out upon the desolate until the end?
In this context the answer is: the wrath of God.
One cannot help but think of the analogous events of the book of Revelation. There, we are told
that because of the iniquity in the world in the last days, God will pour out seven last plagues for
in them the wrath of God is filled up. The expression ‘filled up’ could very well be translated
‘consummated’ or ‘complete.’ In fact, the Reina-Valera Spanish version uses the word
‘consumada.’ Significantly, as soon as all the cups have been poured out, the words are heard from
the heavenly temple, ‘It is done.’ (Revelation 15:1; 17:17). Putting all these concepts together we

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 350 of 369
have: The cup of the iniquity of the wicked will be filled to the brim (see Genesis 15:16) and then
God will pour out upon them the plagues and these will bring to an end the wrath of God.
Noteworthy is the fact that in his indictment of the Jewish leaders, Jesus employed the symbolism
of the cup: ‘Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.’ (Matthew 23:32). In other words, there
was no longer any room for mercy. When God poured out His wrath upon them He was finished
with them. They drank the dregs of the wrath of God. For this reason, the apostle Paul says that
the wrath of God had fallen upon the Jews ‘to the uttermost.’ (I Thessalonians 2:16).
At the end of verse 27 we find once again that this outpouring of the unmitigated wrath of God
had already been determined beforehand. This is clearly indicated by the expression: ‘that
determined shall be poured out upon the desolate.’ This is clear evidence that even though the
city and temple were destroyed in the year 70 A. D., the sentence had already been determined
previously, in the year 34 A. D. It is common in the Bible for the door of mercy to close sometime
before destruction falls. Two monumental examples are: The flood where the door of mercy closed
seven days before the destruction of the world and the end of the world when the door of probation
will close before the Second coming (Revelation 22:11-12)

Did Probation end in 31 AD?

This brings us to our last point and it is this: Why do we choose 34 A. D. as the ending point of
the seventy-week prophecy? Didn’t Jesus say that probation closed when He left the temple for
the last time in the middle of the last week? (Matthew 23:38). It would seem so. However, several
things must be taken into consideration:
In the prophecy of Daniel 9 God promised Israel seventy full weeks of probation. If their probation
ended in the year 31 A. D., then they did not get the full 70 weeks as God had promised.

More than once during His ministry, Jesus stated that He was only sent to the lost sheep of the
house of Israel. That is to say, His mission was limited to the Jewish nation. At first sight this
appears to be a rather calloused statement but upon closer scrutiny we can understand what Jesus
meant. His mission involved only the Jews at this point because the probationary period of the
Jewish nation had not yet come to a full end.

Though the Jews cried out at His trial: ‘We have no king but Caesar,’ ‘His blood be upon us and
our children’ and ‘release unto us Barabbas,’ probation did not close for the Jewish nation at that
time. After the ascension, Peter explained that Jesus sat down at the right hand of God in order ‘to
give repentance unto Israel.’ (Acts 5:31) Furthermore, in the first seven chapters of the book of
Acts the gospel was preached only to the Jews. It was not till chapter 10 that the gospel was
preached to the Gentiles. This indicates that the door of mercy was still open to the Jewish nation
even after the ascension of Jesus.

In Matthew 23:32-38 we find further evidence that probation did not close for the Jewish nation
when Jesus was crucified. In these verses Jesus reached the climax of his indictment against the
Jewish leaders. In verses 34-36 Jesus stated:

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 351 of 369
“Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and
crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city,
that on you may come all the righteous blood that has been shed on the earth, from the blood of
righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the
temple and the altar. Assuredly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.”

Don’t miss the point of this passage. Even though these words were spoken by Jesus three days
before his crucifixion, He still promised to send (the verbs are in the future tense) Israel prophets,
wise men, and scribes. And who were these prophets, wise men and scribes? We can glean some
clues from what Jesus said would be done to them. According to Jesus, some would be killed,
others scourged in the synagogues and still others persecuted from city to city. Acts 5:40-41 tells
us that Peter and John were scourged in the synagogue. Saul of Tarsus was guilty of killing many,
the most notable of which was Stephen (Acts 26:10-11; 7:58). Noteworthy also is the fact that
Saul of Tarsus later recounted that he persecuted many from city to city (Acts 8:3; 26:11). Acts
6:3 explains that the seven deacons were wise men. Peter’s sermon on the Day of Pentecost was a
prophetic sermon and his ability to read the hearts of Ananias and Sapphira also reveals that he
possessed the prophetic gift. And we shall see shortly that Stephen was the last prophet who ever
spoke to literal Israel.

Jesus also made it crystal clear in this passage that the cup of Israel’s iniquity did not fill up until
they rejected the messengers which were sent by Jesus to them after His crucifixion. Only then
was the blood of all the martyrs demanded of that generation (verse 35).

Matthew 22:1-10 also provides evidence that probation did not close for the Jewish nation when
Jesus was crucified. In this parable, after the oxen and fatted cattle had been killed (symbolizing
the death of Jesus), God sent out messengers to invite the Jews to His Son’s wedding supper (verse
4). But the messengers were ignored, seized, treated spitefully and killed (verse 6). As a result,
God sent out His armies to destroy those murderers and their city (verse 7). The gospel then went
to those in the highways and byways, that is to say, to the Gentiles (verses 8-10). Particularly
important here is the fact that the Father sent out messengers to the Jewish nation even after the
death of Jesus. It was only after the Jews rejected the calls of these messengers that the Father
decided to destroy them and their city.
In Ezekiel 11:22-23 we find a picture of God’s lingering mercy for Old Testament Jerusalem. Even
though at this point, Jerusalem had been judged and Nebuchadnezzar was on his way to destroy
the city, we are told that the Shekinah left the temple and lingered on the Mount of Olives, as if
loath to leave! In the same way, when Jesus left the temple, and pronounced the awesome words:
‘Behold, your house is left unto you desolate,’ he was loath to leave. We can almost hear Him say:
‘How can I give you up, oh Israel?’ Mercy lingered on for three and a half years.

Ellen White concurs with our assessment of the Biblical evidence:

“Through the preaching of the apostles and their associates, God would cause light to shine upon
them; they would be permitted to see how prophecy had been fulfilled, not only in the birth and
life of Christ, but in His death and resurrection. The children were not condemned for the sins of
the parents; but when, with a knowledge of all the light given to their parents, the children rejected
the additional light granted to themselves, they became partakers of the parents’ sins, and filled
up the measure of their iniquity.” The Great Controversy, p. 28
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 352 of 369
Ending Date for the Seventy Weeks
Many have been perplexed by the apparent absence of a clearly defined ending event for the
prophecy of the seventy weeks. But is such an event really missing in Daniel 9? Seventh-day
Adventists have consistently believed that the stoning of Stephen marked the conclusion of the
seventy weeks. But, are we justified in believing this? I believe the Biblical evidence fully
vindicates the Adventist point of view. And why is this?
In our study of Daniel 9:24 we saw that six things would be accomplished during the time period
of the seventy weeks. One of these was ‘to seal up vision and prophecy.’ What does this expression
mean? The same expression, ‘to seal up’ (hatam) is used earlier in this verse and is translated, ‘to
make an end of sins.’ In other words, one of the accomplishments of the seventy weeks was to
bring prophecy and vision to an end for the Jewish nation. How and when did this happen?
A careful examination of Acts 6 and 7 reveals that Stephen was the last prophet who was given a
vision for Israel. Let’s take a look at the evidence.
In order to comprehend the significance of the events in Acts 6-7 we must first understand the
covenant pattern in the Old Testament. Due principally to the studies of George Mendenhall and
Meredith Kline scholars now know that God’s covenant with Israel in the Old Testament follows
the same basic pattern as the secular suzerainty treaties of the Late Bronze Age (1550-1200 B. C.).
We will use Joshua 24 (which describes the covenant renewal just before Israel entered the
Promised Land) to exemplify the basic components of the Old Testament covenant between God
and Israel:
Preamble (24:1-2)
Historical prologue (24:2-13)
Covenant stipulations (24:15)
Covenant blessings and curses (24:16-20)
Oath of obedience (24:21)
Witnesses (24:22)
Covenant ratification (24:23-25)
Arrangements for covenant perpetuation (24:26)
Covenant notarized (24:27)
When Israel broke the covenant, God sent them prophets to bring legal proceedings against them.
It is important to keep in mind that the prophets were God’s lawyers bringing a lawsuit against
Israel. The proceeding has come to be known as a covenant lawsuit (rib). Though there are several
examples of this in the Old Testament, we will take Micah 6 as our example (the word rib is there
translated ‘contend’ and ‘controversy’).
Call to the witnesses to give ear to the proceedings (6:1-2)
Introductory statement of the case at issue (6:2)
Recital of God’s benevolent acts (6:3-5)
The indictment (6:6-7)
The sentence (6:8)
As will be noticed above, the recital of God’s benevolent acts toward Israel was fundamental
both to the establishment of the covenant and to the covenant lawsuit. Something which has
perplexed scholars is the inordinately long historical discourse which Stephen gave before the
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 353 of 369
Sanhedrin. The members of the Sanhedrin were the intelligentsia of Israel. Why would Stephen
presumably waste his time and theirs with a history they knew all too well? The answer lies in the
fact that Stephen was God’s prophet bringing God’s covenant lawsuit against Israel. And as we
shall see below, this would be God’s final lawsuit.
There is an amazing parallel between the trial of Christ and the trial of Stephen. Let’s notice a few
similarities:
Both were taken before the Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:59; Mark 14:55; Acts 6:12, 15)
Both were accused by false witnesses (Mark 14:55; Acts 6:11, 13-14)
Both reviewed the history of the Jewish nation. Both spoke about God sending the prophets and
finally sending His own son (Matthew 23:32; 21:33-44; Acts 7)
In both, money was paid as a bribe to the false witnesses (Matthew 26:60; Acts 6:11)
Both were accused of speaking against Moses and the temple (Matthew 27:40; John 11:50-52
Acts 6:13-14)
Both accused the Jewish leaders of shutting their ears to the truth about the Messiah (Matthew
23:29-36; Acts 7:51-54)
Both prayed for God to forgive the sin of their enemies (Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60)
Both were killed outside the city (Hebrews 13:12; Acts 7:58). The innocence of both could be
seen on their face (John 19:4, 6; Acts 6:15)
In both there was a ‘mob mentality’ (Matthew 27:24; Acts 7:57-58)
These parallels suggest that Stephen was repeating the experience of Jesus. That is to say, what
the Jewish leaders had done with Jesus they were now doing to Stephen.

Stoning of Stephen

Now we must examine more closely the trial and condemnation of Stephen. As we have already
seen, God undertook many covenant lawsuits against Israel in the Old Testament. A close
examination of these lawsuits reveals that they were not final and irrevocable. In fact, the prophets
usually called Israel to repentance so that God, in mercy, could ‘drop’ his lawsuit against them.
But the case of Stephen is different. There is a sense of finality in the experience of Stephen which
is lacking in the previous lawsuits.
Stephen was taken before the Sanhedrin, the highest earthly authority of the Jewish nation. It was
the final court of appeal, the Supreme Court, if you please. There, in fine prophetic fashion, and
in harmony with the covenant lawsuit pattern, Stephen presented his defense by appealing to the
history of Israel from the time of Abraham till the coming of the Just One (Acts 7:2-53). But at
the end of his discourse, the accused became the accuser. The Sanhedrin presumed to indict
Stephen but he ended up indicting them!! Notice the denunciation:

“Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost; as your
fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? And they have slain
them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now become the
betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not
kept it.” (Acts 7:51-53)
Significantly, up to this point in his discourse, Stephen has spoken of the fathers in terms of ‘our
fathers’ (Acts 7:11, 19, 38, 44, 45). In good prophetic fashion, he includes himself as part of the

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 354 of 369
historical patrimony of Israel (as did Daniel when he repeatedly said in Daniel 9, ‘we have sinned’).
But at the conclusion of his speech he dissociates himself from them by saying, ‘your fathers’
(notice that Jesus also made reference to ‘your fathers’ in His indictment of the Jewish leaders;
Matthew 23:32). He could no longer in good conscience be in solidarity with literal Israel. In
other words, he was distancing himself from the patrimony of literal Israel because he knew that
after they killed him, they would no longer be God’s peopleBthe theocracy would have come to
an ignominious end!
Also of great importance is the fact that Stephen, unlike the prophets before him, did not make a
call to repentance. This would seem to indicate that the Jewish leaders were beyond the point of
repentance; they had made their final and irrevocable decision to reject the Messiah. This is
indicated by the expressions Stephen used in his indictment as well as by the reaction of the
Sanhedrin to his words. Notice that he called them stiff-necked and uncircumcised in hearts and
ears and accused them of resisting the Holy Spirit. He also accused them of betraying and
murdering Jesus and breaking the covenant. There is no mention of future messengers or
opportunities.
The reaction of the leaders of the Sanhedrin is important because it reveals their incurable rejection
of the Messiah. Instead of receiving the message of Stephen who spoke with the fullness of the
power of the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:55), with untempered hatred they ‘gnashed on him with their
teeth . . . and cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,
and cast him out of the city and stoned him. . .’ (Acts 7:54, 57-58) Notice that the verdict was
unanimous—they were all of one accord. The apostles were of one accord on the side of Christ
and the Sanhedrin was of one accord against Christ. Thus the Jewish Sanhedrin made its choice.
By stoning Stephen, they silenced the last prophet who would ever be sent to them. Truly,
prophecy came to an end for literal Israel at this time!!

But the prophecy of the seventy weeks indicated that vision (chazon) would also come to an end
at the conclusion of the last week. Did this happen as predicted? The answer is a resounding yes!!
Acts chapter seven not only indicates that Stephen was the last prophet sent to Israel but it also
leaves no doubt that he received the last vision as well.
It seems that what particularly incensed the members of the Sanhedrin was the vision Stephen had
of Jesus in heaven standing on the right hand of God. This was a vision for there is no evidence
that anyone other than Stephen saw it! The critical question is: Did Stephen see Jesus as He was
and where He was at that very moment or was he transported in vision to the future to see Jesus
as He will appear when He comes again? The evidence seems to indicate that this was a prophetic
vision where Stephen was carried to the future to see Jesus coming as the Son of Man.
As we have previously studied, Jesus taught in His parables (Matthew 21:33-45; Matthew 22:1-
10; Matthew 23:32-39) that when the kingdom should be taken from the Jews, it would be given
to the Gentiles. This being the case, we should find an event to mark the end of the seventy weeks
which not only closes the door of probation for the Jewish theocracy but also opens the door for
the gospel to go to the Gentiles. Does the stoning of Stephen fulfill this specification? Once again,
the answer is a resounding yes!
It can hardly be a coincidence that the ringleader in the stoning of Stephen was a champion of
Orthodox Judaism, Saul of Tarsus (see Philippians 3:3-9). At the precise moment probation was

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 355 of 369
closing for the Jewish theocracy, God—irony of ironies—had already chosen His champion to the
Gentiles and he was present at the stoning of Stephen! Paul later reminisced about this experience
with the following words:
“And when the blood of thy martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting unto
his death, and kept the raiment of them that slew him. And he said unto me, Depart; for I will send
thee far hence unto the Gentiles.” (Acts 22:20-21)
The sequence of events in Acts 1-11 clearly reveals that the stoning of Stephen was a watershed
event. In Acts 1:8 Jesus had said to His disciples:
“But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses
unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the
earth.”
Notice the ever broadening concentric circles in this verse:
Jerusalem and Judea (Acts 1-6)
Stoning of Stephen (Acts 7)
Samaria (Acts 8 especially verse 25)
Saul’s Conversion (Acts 9)
Gospel to Gentiles (Uttermost Part of the Earth) (Acts 10-28)

It will be noticed that the gospel went to the uttermost part of the earth only after the conversion
of Saul of Tarsus. In fact, it was Paul who took the gospel to every region of the Roman Empire
through his missionary journeys. Thus in Acts 7 probation closes for the Jewish theocracy and in
chapter 9 the champion to the Gentiles is converted. That is to say, one door closed and shortly
thereafter the other opened.
The official beginning of Paul’s ministry is described in Acts 13:1-2. There Paul and Barnabas
were ordained to the gospel ministry. Paul and Barnabas then traveled to Antioch of Pisidia where
Paul preached a long gospel sermon to the Jews in the synagogue (13:16-41). The Gentiles then
begged Paul to preach to them (13:42-43). The next Sabbath almost the whole city came out to
hear the word of God (13:44). This provoked the jealousy of the Jews and they contradicted and
blasphemed (13:45). This led Paul to say some very significant words:
‘It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you; but seeing ye put it
from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so
hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou
shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.’ (13:46-47)
Notice that according to Paul the gospel was to be preached to the Jews first. And why was this?
Simply because, as we have seen, seventy weeks had been measured off for the Jewish nation! But
when the Jewish nation rejected the Messiah, by divine command, Paul and Barnabas turned to
the Gentiles. Notice that the door of mercy did not close for individual Jews after 34 AD. This
can be seen in the fact that Saul of Tarsus was converted after the year 34 AD

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 356 of 369
 “STUDIES IN DANIEL 1-10”
by Pastor Stephen Bohr

LESSON #23 – NOTES ON DANIEL 10

Historical Time Frame

Daniel was 88 years old when the events of Daniel 10 transpired. We know this because we are
told in volume four of the Testimonies, (Ellen G. White) page 570, that Daniel was about 18 years
of age when he was taken captive to Babylon (Daniel 1:1-2). The events of chapter 10 begin while
Daniel was still in Babylon even though Cyrus had already given the decree authorizing the return
of the Jews to Jerusalem. We know this because Daniel was by the great river Hiddekel, that is to
say, the Tigris (10:4).

Chronological Matters
It is of the utmost importance to remember the dates which are given in Daniel chapters eight
through eleven. The events of Daniel 8 took place in the year 550 BC roughly eleven years before
the fall of Babylon (in 539 BC) and fourteen years before Cyrus’ decree of release (in 536 BC).
Daniel 9 bears the date 538 BC At this point Babylon had fallen but Cyrus’ decree of release had
not been proclaimed. The events of chapter 10 transpire in the year 535 BC At this point Cyrus’
decree had already been given and the first wave of Jews had returned to rebuild the temple.
Chapters 11 and 12 bear the same date as chapter 10 because it is the continuation of it.
Daniel 11:1 would seem to indicate that the entire chapter should be dated in the same year as
Daniel 9 (538). This would mean that the events of Daniel 11 transpired before those of chapter
10. A careful analysis of Daniel 11:1, however, reveals that this verse contains a parenthetical
statement inserted by Daniel between chapter 10:21 and 11:2. In other words, Daniel 11:1 is out
of chronological order with what comes before and after. In 11:1 Daniel is simply explaining that
he also confirmed and strengthened Darius the Mede in the first year of his rule (Daniel 9:1-2) In
short, the text of Daniel 10:20-11:2 should look like this:
“Knowest thou wherefore I [Gabriel] come unto thee? And now I return to fight with the prince
of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come. But I [Gabriel] will shew
thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these
things, but Michael your prince. (Also in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm
and to strengthen him). And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three
kings in Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they all: and by his strength through his
riches he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 357 of 369
It is obvious that the words in bold both before and after Daniel’s parenthetical statement bear a
close relationship to each another. In both there is a reference to Persia and Grecia and in both
Gabriel says to Daniel ‘I will shew thee the truth.’ It is safe to conclude, then, that the introductory
vision of Daniel 10 is continued in chapter 11. Both chapters bear the same date. In actual fact, as
we shall see, Daniel 10 is the introduction to the explanation provided by Gabriel in 11:2-12:3.
Daniel 12:4-13 should then be understood as the epilogue to the book of Daniel in general and of
Daniel 8-12 in particular.

Daniel 10:1
The ‘thing’ (dabar) or ‘word’ which Gabriel revealed to Daniel in the third year of Cyrus (535
BC) was actually the explanation we find in Daniel 11:2-12:3. Significantly, Daniel did not receive
a new vision in this year. He merely received a word (‘thing’) which explained the vision (mareh)
which had previously been given in chapter 8. For the purpose of understanding, we will quote
verse 1 and provide explanatory notes in brackets and bold:

“In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia [535 BC] a thing was revealed unto Daniel [the
explanation of Daniel 11:2-12:3], whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing [the
explanation of Daniel 11:2-12:3] was true, but the time appointed was long [because the
explanation covers the periods of Persia, Greece, Imperial Rome, Papal Rome in its two stages,
the close of probation, the time of trouble and the final deliverance of God’s people]; and he
understood the thing [the explanation of Daniel 11:2-12:3] and had understanding of the vision
[mareh: the vision of the 2300 days of Daniel 8:14].”

Daniel 10:2-4
In these verses we find Daniel fasting and praying. Up till this point in the book we have seen
Daniel as a man of intense prayer (Daniel 2:17-18; 6:10-11; 9:3-19). But in Daniel 10 we are
informed that Daniel not only prayed but also was mourning and fasting. What grave historical
circumstances led Daniel not only to pray but also to mourn and fast?
We know that Daniel’s agony had nothing to do with whether the decree would be given for his
people to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple. At this point the decree had already been given
and the first wave of exiles had returned (Ezra 1:1-4; 3:1-8; 1:1). Neither did it have to do with
whether the decree to restore and build Jerusalem would be given on schedule because this decree
was still eighty years in the future. Furthermore, Daniel was not mourning because he did not
understand the ‘vision’ (mareh) of Daniel 8 because we are told in verse 1 that he did understand
it at this point in time. Why, then, was Daniel praying, mourning and fasting? There appear to be
two reasons.
In the first place, three years before the events of Daniel 10, Gabriel had already explained in broad
strokes the basic elements of the prophecy of the 2300 days yet there were still many details which
were unclear to Daniel. This was the motivation for Daniel’s prayer. The prophet was seeking
wisdom to understand the unexplained elements of the vision of Daniel 8. In response to Daniel’s
plea, God provided the material we find in Daniel 11:2-12:3. Daniel 10:1-12:3.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 358 of 369
Notice the following comment by Ellen G. White:
“Upon the occasion just described [Daniel 9], the angel Gabriel imparted to Daniel all the
instruction which he was then able to receive. A few years afterward, however, the prophet desired
to learn more of the subjects not yet fully explained, and again set himself to seek light and wisdom
from God. ‘In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks. I ate no pleasant bread, neither
came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all. . . .’” Ellen G. White, The
Sanctified Life, p. 49

Perhaps this would be a good time to examine the relationship between the prophecies of Daniel
eight, nine, ten and eleven. The close relationship between these prophecies can be discerned in
the continued use of the words ‘vision’ and ‘understand’.
In Daniel 8:16 Gabriel was given the command to make Daniel understand the vision (mareh)
but at the end of the chapter (8:26-27) we are told that Daniel did not understand the vision
(mareh). In chapter 9:23 Gabriel came back to Daniel and told him: ‘understand the matter, and
consider the vision’ (mareh). After Gabriel’s explanation we are informed in Daniel 10:1 that
Daniel ‘understood the thing, and had understanding in the vision’ (mareh). Yet in Daniel 10:2-
3, 12 we find that Daniel pleaded to God for further understanding. As a result, Gabriel came back
to explain further details which were still unclear in Daniel’s mind. Gabriel explained: ‘Now I am
come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision
(chazon) is for many days.’ Daniel 10:14. This further understanding was given to Daniel in
chapter 11 where Gabriel provided the fullest explanation of the vision of Daniel 8.
Significantly, as we shall see in our study of Daniel 12, the prophet did not even then understand
everything (Daniel 12:8-10). That is to say, when the book of Daniel ended there were still many
things which Daniel did not comprehend. This is why God gave the book of Revelation. Daniel 8-
12 is a close knit prophecy and the Apocalypse is a Revelation or explanation of that prophecy.
Regarding this Ellen White states:

“The things revealed to Daniel were afterward complemented by the revelation made to John on
the Isle of Patmos. These books should be carefully studied . . .The book of Daniel is unsealed in
the revelation to John, and carries us forward to the last scenes of this earth’s history.” Ellen G.
White, Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 114-115.

The prophecies of Daniel 8-11 are also connected by the phrase, ‘the time of the end.’ In Daniel
8:17, 19 the prophet was told that the mareh is for the ‘time of the end’. In our previous study of
Daniel 8 we noticed that the word mareh is used particularly to denote the events connected with
the conclusion of the 2300 days. What this means is that the mareh would not be present truth
neither would it be fully comprehended until the ‘time of the end.’
Significantly there is no reference to the time of the end in Daniel 9 because the focus of this
chapter is not on the end-time but rather on the time of probation for Daniel’s literal people, that
is, the Jewish nation. But in chapter 10:14 Daniel is once again informed that the vision (chazon)
is for what will befall his people (spiritual Israel) in the latter days ‘for yet the vision (chazon) is
for many days.’ One cannot fail to notice that the word chazon is used for ‘vision’ in Daniel 10:14
instead of mareh. And why is this?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 359 of 369
In order to answer this question, we must keep in mind that the word chazon in Daniel 8 is used to
describe the totality of the vision from the time of Persia until the cleansing of the sanctuary at the
conclusion of the 2300 days. On the other hand, the word mareh is used in a more restricted sense
to describe the apparition of the two heavenly messengers who explained the time element of the
2300 days (Daniel 8:13-14). We can now understand why Gabriel used mareh in Daniel 8:17
while he used chazon in Daniel 10:14. The reason is actually quite simple. You see, when Gabriel
returned in Daniel 11, he not only explained the time element of the 2300 days but he also
explained the totality of the vision of Daniel 8 once again beginning with Persia and ending with
the final persecution and deliverance of God’s people. In other words, he explained once again not
only the mareh but also the total chazon.
Moving on to Daniel 11:40 we find a clear description of the events which would befall Daniel’s
people during the ‘time of the end’. After the papacy ruled the world for 1260 years (Daniel 11:31-
39), it would be given a deadly wound in 1798 by the king of the south—France (Daniel 11:40).
But then it would recover its power and overwhelm the world even to the point of attempting to
annihilate Daniel’s end-time people (11:40-45). But in the hour of utmost extremity, God would
intervene to deliver His people (12:1). These events which begin in Daniel 11:40 are the ones
which had not been explained by Gabriel in Daniel 8 and 9. Notice the excellent summary provided
by Louis Were:
“In Daniel 9 the prophecy of the 2300 days was explained down to the overthrow of the Jewish
nation as God’s chosen people and the destruction of Jerusalem. But the prophet had not yet been
told all the rest of the time belonging to the 2300 days and the final events of earth’s history. He
therefore prayed for light on these things, and Gabriel came explaining to Daniel the reason for
his delay [more on this later]: ‘But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and
twenty days [the 21 days Daniel was praying]: but lo, Michael the first Prince came to help me. .
. . Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet
the vision is for many days . . . and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia.’ (Daniel
10:2-20). Louis F. Were, The Battle for the Kingship of the World, pp. 12-13
When Gabriel concluded his explanation in Daniel 11:2-12:3, the prophet was told to ‘shut up the
words and seal up the book until the time of the end’. In other words, Daniel chapters 8-12 would
be in great measure unintelligible until 1798. But Daniel was assured that at the time of the end
the book would be opened and knowledge of this prophecy would be increased (Daniel
12:4). This promise was fulfilled in Revelation 10 where the last half of the book of Daniel was
opened during the Great Advent Awakening of the 1830's and 1840's.
Let’s consider now a few things about the epilogue of Daniel’s ‘little book’. In this epilogue
(Daniel 12:5-13) Gabriel gave additional chronological explanations but these proved to be too
much for Daniel’s understanding (12:8-9) so the prophet was told: ‘But go thou thy way till the
end be: for thou shalt rest and stand up in thy lot at the end of the days.’ (Daniel 12:13). At this
point Gabriel decided to burden Daniel no more. He simply told the prophet that these things were
not for his time but rather for the time of the end. The enigmatic statement, ‘thou shalt rest and
stand in thy lot’ could be taken to mean that Daniel was to resurrect at the end of time or that he
would stand up figuratively to speak through his writings at the time of the end:

“Honored by men with the responsibilities of state and with the secrets of kingdoms bearing
universal sway, Daniel was honored by God as His ambassador, and was given many revelations
of the mysteries of ages to come. His wonderful prophecies, as recorded by him in chapters 7 to
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 360 of 369
12 of the book bearing his name, were not fully understood even by the prophet himself; but before
his life labors closed, he was given the blessed assurance that "at the end of the days"--in the
closing period of this world's history--he would again be permitted to stand in his lot and place. It
was not given him to understand all that God had revealed of the divine purpose. "Shut up the
words, and seal the book," he was directed concerning his prophetic writings; these were to be
sealed "even to the time of the end." "Go thy way, Daniel," the angel once more directed the faithful
messenger of Jehovah; "for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. . . . Go thou
thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days." Daniel 12:4,
9, 13 Ellen G. White, Prophets and Kings, p. 547)
One final link between the prophecies of Daniel 8-11 can be found in the role performed by the
angel Gabriel. In Chapter 8 Gabriel was told to explain the vision to Daniel. When Daniel failed
to understand the vision, it was Gabriel who came back in Daniel 9 to explain it. And in chapters
ten (10:11) and eleven (11:2), it was Gabriel who contended with the prince and the kings of Persia
and it was Gabriel who gave the explanation we find in Daniel 11:2-12:3.
But there was a second and more important reason why Daniel was agonizing in prayer. As we
have previously noted, the events of Daniel 10 took place in the year 535 B. C. Just one year
earlier Cyrus had given a decree authorizing the rebuilding of the temple and had even provided
materials to carry forward the task (Ezra 1:1-4). The first wave of Jews had enthusiastically
returned to Jerusalem and quickly laid the foundations of the temple and the altar (Ezra 3:8-10).
At first the Samaritans feigned to have great interest in the rebuilding of the temple and offered to
help (Ezra 4:1-2). But when they were rebuffed by Zerubbabel (Ezra 4:3), the opposition began.
Notice the words of Ezra:
“Then the people of the land weakened the hands of the people of Judah, and troubled them in
building and hired counselors against them, to frustrate their purpose, all the days of Cyrus king
of Persia, even until the reign of Darius king of Persia.” (Ezra 4:4-5)
During the reign of Cambyses, the opposition became so great that for a time the building of the
temple was suspended. In the reign of Darius Hystaspes, the governors of the land even came to
the builders and demanded to know who had given them permission to rebuild the temple (Ezra
5:2-4). A letter was sent to king Darius to find out if the Jews had royal permission to rebuild the
temple (Ezra 5:7-17). In Ezra 6:1-3 we are told that Darius searched the archives in order to
ascertain if any previous decree had been given which authorized the Jews to rebuild the temple.
When Cyrus’ decree was found in the archives, Darius sent a letter renewing the decree of Cyrus
(Ezra 6:7-13). As a result of this confirmatory decree and due to the help of Zechariah and Haggai,
the temple was finally finished in the year 515.
It is in the context of this opposition that we must understand Daniel’s mourning in chapter 10.
Daniel knew that the temple needed to be rebuilt in order for the prophecy of the seventy weeks
and the 2300 days to be fulfilled. Yet the historical circumstances seemed to indicate that the
temple would not be rebuilt on schedule. So Daniel poured out his heart to God in prayer pleading
for the Lord to fulfill His promise.
Verses 4-6
In these verses we have a magnificent Christophany. A vision of Christ was given to Daniel and
the description is virtually identical with that of the glorified Christ in Revelation 1:13-16. This

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 361 of 369
seems to indicate that Daniel did not see Jesus as He was garbed at that very moment, but rather
as He would be garbed upon his inauguration as High Priest after His ascension.
Verses 7-9
In these verses we find a description of the impact the vision had on those who were present with
Daniel. Even though they did not see the glorified Christ, they felt the intense solemnity of the
occasion. We are told that they fled to hide and thus Daniel remained alone. We are also informed
that Daniel heard Christ speak to him but the words are not recorded. The word for ‘appearance’
here is mareh.

Verses 10-14
As Daniel lay on the ground, a hand touched him and set him upon his knees and the palms of his
hands. The person who touched Daniel is identified as Gabriel. Some have erroneously concluded
that the person whom Daniel saw in his vision (verses 5-6) is the same as the one who touched
him. But there is no reason to reach this conclusion. Verse 10 marks a clear break between the
personage Daniel saw in vision and the person who lifted him up. This is seen by the words: ‘And,
behold, a hand [not necessarily the hand of the person he saw in vision] touched me, which set me
upon my knees and upon the palms of my hands.’ Daniel 10:10.
As we have previously noted from the book of Ezra, the Samaritans assiduously opposed the
rebuilding of the temple, even to the point of complaining to the Persian kings. As we have seen,
during the reigns of Cambyses and Darius I the work on the temple was actually suspended for a
time. Now, if the book of Ezra were our only source of information about this experience, we
might conclude that the opposition was due to mere human factors. But Daniel 10 gives us a
glimpse behind the veil of human history. Here we discern how human events in the visible earthly
realm were being influenced by powers in the invisible cosmic realm. Verse 13 describes this battle
between the prince of Persia and Gabriel, a battle so intense that it was finally necessary for
Michael to come to Gabriel’s aid:
“But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but lo, Michael, one
of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.”
Several questions emerge as we read this verse. Who is the prince of the kingdom of Persia? Who
is Michael? And what are these powers fighting about? We must first of all recognize that the
prince of the kingdom of Persia is not the same as the king of Persia. There are 420 uses of the
word ‘prince’ in the Old Testament and not once is the word used to denote a king. In actual fact,
the word is most frequently used to describe military commanders. Daniel 10:13 makes it
abundantly clear that Gabriel and Michael were working on two fronts. First, they were contending
with the prince of the kingdom of Persia and secondly they were working with the kings of Persia.
Thus, there is a clear cut distinction between the prince of Persia and the kings of Persia. Who is
this prince of the kingdom of Persia? And who is Michael who stands watch over Daniel’s people?
Before we can answer these questions it is imperative to realize that in ancient cultures it was
believed that every kingdom had its own particular ‘guardian angel’ which looked out for the
interests and welfare of the nation. That being the case, the prince of the kingdom of Persia would
be Persia’s guardian angel and Michael would be Israel’s guardian angel. Let’s begin by checking
Michael’s ID.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 362 of 369
Michael is a fascinating personage. In Scripture the name appears five times, always in apocalyptic
passages where Michael is in conflict with Satan. Michael’s very name is a challenge to Satan. It
means, ‘Who is like God?’ In Revelation 12:7-9 it is Michael who casts Satan out of heaven. It is
of more than passing interest that at the beginning of the great controversy, Michael is spoken of
as having his angels and Satan is spoken of as having his. At the conclusion of the great
controversy, Jesus will come with his holy angels (Matthew 24:31) and Satan and his angels will
be cast in the lake of fire (Matthew 25:41).
In Jude 9 Michael contends with Satan for the body of Moses. There can be no doubt that Michael
had come on this occasion to resurrect Moses from the dead (see Deuteronomy 34:5-6; Matthew
17:3). In other words, Michael is the angel of the resurrection. Is it a coincidence that when Jesus
comes to resurrect the dead at His second coming, he will ‘descend from heaven with a shout, with
the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God?’ (I Thessalonians 4:16; see also John
5:26-29 where we are told that the voice of Jesus will resurrect the dead).
The book of Daniel makes three references to Michael. Two of them are found in the chapter we
are presently studying (verses 13, 21) and the other one is in Daniel 12:1. This last verse is of
particular importance for two reasons. First, Michael is spoken of as the great prince who stands
watch over Israel. That is to say, Michael is Israel’s guardian angel. Second, Michael is the
deliverer of Israel and the one who resurrects those who sleep in the dust of the earth.
Michael must also be identified with the enigmatic personage who in the Old Testament is called
the ‘Angel of the Lord’. Though the scope of our present study will not allow us to examine every
reference to the Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament, it is imperative that we take a look at a
few key passages.
The first passage we must take a look at is Zechariah 3:1-5. This passage leaves no doubt that the
Angel of the Lord in the Old Testament is the same person as Michael. In this passage the Angel
of the Lord is in conflict with Satan and the issue of the conflict is Israel (verse 2). Of particular
significance are the words: ‘The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan’ (verse 2) These are the very words
which Michael uttered to Satan when He came to resurrect Moses (Jude 9). Thus, a comparison of
Zechariah 3:1-5 and Jude 9 reveals, without any shadow of doubt, that the Angel of the Lord is
Michael.
In Genesis 32:11, 24, 26, 30 we find Jacob praying for God to deliver him from the wrath of his
brother, Esau. This time of anguish is known in other places of Scripture as the ‘time of Jacob’s
trouble.’ In fact, Genesis 32 is in the background of the time of trouble spoken of in Daniel 12:1.
As Jacob was praying, the Angel of the Lord (see Hosea 12:3-5) laid hold of him and they began
to struggle. The result of the story is well known. Not only did the Angel deliver Jacob from the
wrath of his brother but he also blessed him and gave him a new name. At the conclusion of this
episode, Jacob called the place Peniel—for I have seen God face to face, and my life has been
preserved’ (this word is frequently translated ‘delivered’ in the Old Testament). Can anyone doubt
that the Angel of the Lord in this story is God?
In Exodus 14:19-20 we are told that the Angel of God led Israel in a pillar of cloud by day and in
a pillar of fire by night to protect them from their enemies. Significantly, this Angel is identified
as God in verse 24.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 363 of 369
The episode of the burning bush is well known. The Angel of the Lord appeared to Moses and
announced that he was going to deliver Israel (Exodus 3:8) from their bondage to the Egyptians.
One cannot help but remember that Michael is spoken of as the end-time deliverer of Israel in
Daniel 12:1. A close inspection of Exodus 3:2-14 reveals that this Angel is also God (see John
8:58-59).
In Joshua 5:13-15 (Amplified Bible) this same Angel is identified as the Prince of the host. As we
saw in our study of Daniel 8, the name, ‘Prince of the host’ is found in only one other place in
Scripture, Daniel 8:11 where Jesus is called ‘the Prince of the host.’ In fact, as we have seen before,
Jesus is referred to in Daniel as ‘the Prince of the host,’ ‘the Prince of princes,’ the ‘Prince of the
covenant,’ and ‘the great Prince.’
There can be no doubt, then, that Michael is Israel’s Guardian Angel. He is Israel’s protector and
deliverer from the power of Satan. He is God! Michael is none other than Jesus Christ!! What an
appropriate name for one who is in contention with Lucifer who declared ‘I will be like the Most
High.’ (Isaiah 14:14) In response to Lucifer’s aspirations Jesus’ name throws out the challenge:
‘Who is Like God’?
We are now ready to identify the prince of the kingdom of Persia. This identification is really a no
brainer. If Michael the Prince is Christ, then the prince of the kingdom of Persia must be Satan.
Jesus called Satan the ‘prince of the world’ on at least three (John 14:30; 12:30-33; 16:11).
Now that we have identified the contending parties, we can discuss the reason for the battle. As
we saw in our study of Daniel 9, God had promised that Israel would spend 70 years in Babylonian
captivity and then would return to their land to rebuild the temple, the city and the walls. But the
restoration and building of the city and walls could not take place until the temple was rebuilt. The
decree of Cyrus in 536 B. C. was a great victory for God. Everything appeared to be going
according to schedule. But then the opposition of the Samaritans ensued. Daniel 10 leaves no doubt
that this opposition did not originate with the Samaritans. The prince of the kingdom of Persia
(Satan) was working to influence the minds of the kings of Persia so that they would halt the work
of rebuilding the temple. At the same time, Gabriel was doing his utmost to influence the minds
of the kings of Persia so that they would authorize the continuation of the work.
For three weeks, while Daniel was mourning and praying, Gabriel struggled with the prince of
Persia and with the minds of the kings of Persia. And at the very end of this period, Michael
Himself came to aid Gabriel in his struggle. There is no doubt that these 21 days should be
understood as literal days. However, it is tempting to understand them in a broader sense as well
by applying the year/day principle. Cyrus gave his decree to rebuild the temple in the year 536
B.C. and the temple was finally finished in the year 515 B. C., exactly 21 years after the decree
was given! During this whole period Gabriel was struggling with Satan and with the kings of Persia
(notice the plural in Daniel 10:13). The book of Ezra itself explains that the work of rebuilding
went on according to schedule because ‘the eye of their God was upon the elders of the Jews, that
they [the Samaritans] could not cause them to cease. . . .’ (Ezra 5:5).
In short, it is as if Gabriel were telling Daniel: ‘I know you have been mourning, fasting and
praying for three full weeks because you wanted a clearer understanding of the end-time elements
of the vision of Daniel 8. The very moment you started to pray, I had every intention of coming
immediately to answer your plea as I had done the previous time you prayed (Daniel 9:20-23) but
this time I was delayed. You see, I was involved in this conflict with the prince of the kingdom of
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 364 of 369
Persia. He was influencing the minds of the Persian kings so that they would halt the rebuilding of
the temple. But at the end of the 21 days, Michael came to help me and we prevailed. The
opposition you have seen by the Samaritans is really the visible manifestation of this invisible
conflict. But now I have finally been able to break away and help you understand ‘what shall befall
thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days.’ (Daniel 10:14).” Don’t miss the
significance of the word yet. This word seems to imply that the vision (chazon) had already been
partially explained in Daniel 9 (the 70 weeks) but that there were yet many days in the vision
which had not yet been explained.
The perspective presented above is corroborated by the Spirit of Prophecy:

“Untiring in their opposition, the Samaritans ‘weakened the hands of the people of Judah, and
troubled them in building, and hired counselors against them, to frustrate their purpose, all the
days of Cyrus king of Persia, even until the reign of Darius.’ (Ezra 4:4, 5) By false reports they
aroused suspicion in minds easily led to suspect. But for many years the powers of evil were held
in check, and the people of Judea had liberty to continue their work.
“While Satan was striving to influence the highest powers in the kingdom of Medo-Persia to show
disfavor to God’s people, angels worked in behalf of the exiles. The controversy was one in which
all heaven was interested. Through the prophet Daniel we are given a glimpse of this mighty
struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil. For three weeks Gabriel wrestled with
the powers of darkness, seeking to counteract the influences at work on the mind of Cyrus; and
before the contest closed, Christ Himself came to Gabriel’s aid [Daniel 10:13 is quoted]. All that
heaven could do in behalf of the people of God was done. The victory was finally gained; the forces
of the enemy were held in check all the days of Cyrus, and all the days of his son Cambyses, who
reigned about seven and a half years.” Ellen G. White, Prophets and Kings, pp. 571-572
“The king of Persia was controlled by the highest of all evil angels. He refused, as did Pharaoh,
to obey the word of the Lord. Gabriel declared, He withstood me twenty-one days by his
representations against the Jews. But Michael came to his help, and then he remained with the
kings of Persia, holding the powers in check, giving right counsel against evil counsel.” Ellen G.
White, Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, volume 4, p. 1173
Verses 15-19
In response to Gabriel’s words, Daniel now bows to the ground and is left speechless. The vision
(mareh) fills him with sorrow and his physical strength is gone. Furthermore, he is left breathless.
Gabriel remedies the situation by giving back Daniel’s speech and by strengthening him.
Verses 20-21

Before further explaining the vision to Daniel in chapter 11, Gabriel informed the prophet that the
battle with Satan was not over:
‘. . . now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia; and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince
of Grecia shall come. But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there
is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.”

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 365 of 369
What Gabriel is telling Daniel is this: ‘I must now return to continue my struggle with the prince
of Persia (Satan). There is still work to do. I must still make sure that the decree of Artaxerxes is
given on schedule to mark the beginning of the 70 weeks and the 2300 days. And when the
kingdom of Persia has fallen, I must continue to do battle with the prince of Grecia (Satan in
control of the Greek kingdom). But before I continue this battle, I will take the time to show you
the events which will transpire from this point on. These events have already been written in the
scripture of truth, that is, in God’s calendar; therefore, their fulfillment is absolutely certain.’

Putting it all Together

In closing, let’s see how the prophecies of Daniel 8, 9, 10 and 11 fit together. We will begin with
chapter 8 and show how each succeeding chapter builds upon the previous ones.

Daniel 8
The chazon (vision) has the following sequence: Persia (8:3-4, 20), Greece (8:3-8, 21), Pagan
Rome (8:9-10), Papal Rome (8:11-12), and the cleansing of the sanctuary in 1844 (8:13-14). Thus
Daniel 8 leads us only to the beginning of the investigative judgment. But, when will this judgment
end? In Daniel 8 just a few remarks are made by Gabriel about events to transpire after 1844
(8:19, 25). Gabriel was told to make Daniel understand the vision (mareh; 8:16) and Daniel was
then informed that the vision (mareh) was for the time of the end (8:16). At the conclusion of
Daniel 8 we are told that Daniel was astonished at the mareh and did not understand it. (8:27).

Daniel 9
Daniel was confused over the mareh of Daniel 8 so he studied Jeremiah’s prophecy of the seventy
years and prayed for understanding (9:1-19). In response to Daniel’s prayer, actually, from the
beginning of his supplications (9:23) Gabriel was sent to give Daniel understanding of the vision
(mareh) of Daniel 8 (9:22-23). Gabriel explained that the answer was given because Daniel was a
man greatly beloved (9:23) Gabriel then explained the first part of the prophecy of the 2300 days,
that is to say, the seventy weeks. In his explanation, Gabriel emphasized that this portion of the
2300 days was for Daniel’s literal city and people (9:24). There is no reference to the time of the
end in Daniel 9 because this prophecy does not deal with end-time events but rather with the
probationary period for the Jewish theocracy. Notably, the seventy weeks begin with the kingdom
of Persia and end with Pagan Rome. Thus they begin with the same kingdom as Daniel 8 but only
reach until the time period of Pagan Rome. But what about the event to transpire beyond the period
of Pagan Rome? Obviously, we would expect Gabriel to come back at some point to explain the
events beyond the period of Pagan Rome and he did!!

Daniel 10-11

Daniel 10 begins with the statement that Daniel understood the mareh (10:1). But he wanted
further light so he prayed to God (10:2-3, 12). In response to Daniel’s prayer, nay, at the
beginning of Daniel’s supplication (10:12) Gabriel was sent to give the prophet understanding
(10:14) because Daniel was greatly beloved (10:11). The understanding which Gabriel came to
give Daniel includes the totality of the chazon but deals particularly with the latter days (10:14).
As he did in Daniel 8, Gabriel began his explanation with Persia and continued with Greece,
Pagan Rome, and Papal Rome during its 1260 years of dominion (11:31-39). This much had

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 366 of 369
already been revealed in Daniel 8. But as Gabriel very briefly insinuated in Daniel 8, there was
more to Papal Rome than its 1260-year career. So in Daniel 11 Gabriel takes us far beyond 1798
and 1844. He explains that the Papacy would receive a mortal wound from France in 1798 (11:40),
that the deadly wound would be healed (11:40-41), and that the Papacy would yet exercise world
dominion. Also included in his explanation was the shaking, the loud cry, the death decree, the
close of probation, the time of trouble, the deliverance of God’s people, the special resurrection
and the everlasting kingdom (Daniel 11:2-12:3). Needless to say, all these events would be further
explained in the book of Revelation.

As we look at the relationship between Daniel 10 and 11-12 we see that in chapter 10, Michael is
standing watch over Daniel’s literal people to save them from their literal enemies as they return
from their literal captivity to rebuild the literal temple. But at the end, Michael is standing watch
over Daniel’s spiritual people who have returned from their spiritual captivity in spiritual Babylon
to rebuild the spiritual temple and who are opposed by spiritual enemies. The end of the seventy
weeks marks the transition point from the literal to the spiritual. That is to say, at the center of
Daniel 9 is Messiah’s work for literal Israel while at the center of Daniel 10-11 is Messiah’s work
for spiritual Israel.

Daniel 8:14 and Daniel 12:1 mark the beginning and ending points of the investigative judgment.
In Daniel 8:14 Jesus goes in to His Father to receive the kingdom and in Daniel 12:1 Jesus stands
up to take over the kingdom. Thus the literary structure of Daniel 8-12 reveals, without any shadow
of doubt that these chapters constitute a unified whole. They are, so to speak, a book within a book.

One final statement from the pen of Ellen White:

“The light that Daniel received direct from God was given especially for these last days. The
visions he saw by the banks of the Ulai [Daniel 8] and the Hiddekel [Daniel 10-11], the great
rivers of Shinar, are now in the process of fulfillment, and all the events foretold will soon have
come to pass.” Ellen G. White, The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, volume 4, p. 1166.
Bold is mine.

Should we not be dedicating our time to the comprehension of these extremely important chapters?

Referring to God’s people in the very last remnant of time, Gabriel promises:

“Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of
the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.” (Daniel 12:10).

Is it not time to understand?

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 367 of 369
Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 368 of 369
 Secrets Unsealed is a 501(C)3 non-profit ministry.
Your prayers and financial support are greatly appreciated.

Studies in Daniel by Pastor Stephen Bohr | SecretsUnsealed.org | SUMtv.org | Page 369 of 369