The Kingdom of Promise and Prophecy

by Robertson L. Whiteside

NEBUCHADNEZZAR’S DREAM

Nebuchadnezzar had a wonderful dream, and required, on penalty of death, that the wise men tell him the dream and its interpretation. None but Daniel could do so. To the king Daniel said: “Thou, O king, sawest, and, behold, a great image. This image, which was mighty, and whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the aspect thereof was terrible. As for this image, its head was of fine gold, its breast and its arms of silver, its belly and its thighs of brass, its legs of iron, its feet part of iron and part of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon its feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them in pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken in pieces together, and became like chaff of the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away, so that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.” (Dan. 2:31-35.)

Before we read the interpretation of this dream, let us observe: (1) that Nebuchadnezzar saw the complete image, as if all its parts existed at the same time; (2) that the stone smote the image on the feet; (3) that the whole image from feet to head was broken in pieces and scattered as dust; (4) and that no place was found for them—no place for such parts as composed that image.

The Interpretation—“Thou art the head of gold. And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee; and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, for as much as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things; and as iron that crusheth all these, shall it break in pieces and crush.... And in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall the sovereignty thereof be left to another people; but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. For as much as thou sawest that a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter.” (Verses 36-45.)

This dream and the interpretation have furnished a starting point for many sermons by gospel preachers. Till recently they all contended that the kingdom of this prophecy was set up in Jerusalem on the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Christ, and then and there entered upon the work which Daniel said it would accomplish. It is now argued by a few brethren that when Jesus comes again the kingdom of this prophecy will then have its real beginning, and will then destroy the image of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. But is there anything in the interpretation to warrant such a radical change from a century of gospel preaching?

The four world kingdoms represented in the image—Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome—came and fell in the order mentioned. Yet Nebuchadnezzar saw them in the image, as if all existed at the same time. The stone is represented as breaking in pieces the whole image—that is, the kingdom of God is represented as destroying all of the four world kingdoms. “It broke in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold.” In truth, it was an image of world empire, and that was broken in pieces, never to be made whole again. Every attempt at world empire, since Rome, has ended in failure, and will continue to fail.

It is also plainly stated that in the days of these kings—that is, while the image still remained—the God of heaven would set up a kingdom, and that this kingdom would destroy the image. The Roman Empire embodied all that was in the other three kingdoms of the image. So long as Rome existed the image stood. The stone smote the image on the feet, but destroyed every part of the image. Every kingdom represented in that image has ceased to be; the image has been entirely destroyed—not a vestige of it remains. It follows, then, with the force of a demonstration, that the kingdom of God has been set up. Even though it be claimed that another world empire is yet to be, it cannot, by any juggling of words or flight of the imagination, be made a part of the image of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. In that image each kingdom merged into the one following it till Rome; then the stone smote the image and destroyed it. As the kingdom was to be set up during the existence of that image, and as that image has been destroyed, it proves beyond a doubt that the God of heaven has set up his kingdom.

So far as the interpretation of the dream shows, the kingdom of God was to destroy only the kingdoms of the image; and it could destroy the first three only as they were represented in the Roman Empire. World Empires died with Rome. The principles of the kingdom of Christ have so modified human thinking as to destroy the possibility of world empire.

But we are told that Daniel’s language shows that these kingdoms are to be destroyed suddenly, and by violent impact. But it cannot be shown that Daniel’s language requires such method of destruction. The kingdom was to grind them to dust. Does that only imply destruction? Besides, the future-kingdom idea is that the kingdom of God will be ushered in in full power; whereas the dream represents it as a stone that destroyed the image and then grew into a mountain that filled the earth. If you still insist that Daniel’s language shows that the kingdoms are to be destroyed by violent impact, then I ask you to consider carefully the language of Jer. 1:9, 10: “Then Jehovah put forth his hand, and touched my mouth; and Jehovah said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth: see, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down and to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.” That is as strong language as Daniel uses in describing the work of the kingdom of God; yet we know that Jeremiah destroyed nothing by violent impact. Yet how these future-kingdom advocates would have stressed this language if it had been used to describe the work of the kingdom instead of the work of Jeremiah! It would be interesting to see them try to show how Dan. 2:44, 45 requires violence, but Jer. 1:9, 10 means “peaceful penetration.”