I’ve been reading your site for several years and you have been a blessing. This question is more for curiosity sake and to help in discussions with “post-trib” friends/family…
In the wide scope of prophecy interpretation there seems to be a commonality that is curious to me. Most pre-trib teachings explain Daniel chapter 7 as a retelling of chapter 2 in relation to what the 4 beasts represent (Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome). On the other hand, a lot of post-trib teachings tend to identify the 4 beasts of chapter 7 as more “modern kingdoms” (Britain-America, Soviet-Russia, Germany, United Nations).
My question is this: Why is it necessary for the post-trib view to characterize the 4 beasts of Daniel 4 in this manner? Or is it? Is there some link between these 4 “modern kingdoms” and the post-trib view that supposedly strengthens the post-trib argument? For that matter – Is it absolutely necessary for the 4 beasts in chapter 7 to be Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome for pre-trib to be true (strictly for arguments sake)? In other words is there a direct or eventual link between the kingdoms in chapter 7 and the Rapture of the Church?
In Daniel’s interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Daniel 2), the Lord made it clear that from his time forward there would only be four kingdoms until the Lord’s Kingdom comes. There’s no Biblical justification for seeing 4 other kingdoms in Daniel 7, and in fact I think doing so contradicts the intent of Daniel 2 . Also the descriptions of the kingdoms in chapter 7 fit what we know about the ones from chapter 2. And finally, interpreting Daniel 7 as referring to Britain-America, Soviet-Russia, Germany, and the United Nations, is inconsistent with the chronology of modern history. The names of these kingdoms are not relevant to either the pre-trib or post -trib positions, so I’ll stick with the traditional interpretation.