THE BEAR AND HIS THREE RIBS-DANIEL 7:5

Daniel chapter 7 is an iconic chapter in the book of Daniel. This chapter has caused many scholars to speculate about the vision Daniel describes. E.W. Bullinger has a very good description of this chapter in the notes of the Companion Bible. These notes are listed below. My notes are in blue. It is important to consider Bullinger’s views on this particular chapter before we tie this chapter to current prophetic news events.

vs. 1= This was 429 B.C. Daniel being eighty-four years old. Three years before the events of chapter 6. This vision is still in Chaldee (the Gentile language), because it is the continuation of chapter 2:44, and shows what will take place in “the days of those kings” before the stone strikes the image. It brings us up to the end of Gentile dominion over Israel. Chapter 8 is in Hebrew, because it specially concerns Israel. It is the writing of “Daniel the prophet” (Matthew 24). This is directly stated by our Lord, Who, seven times in the Gospel of John, declared that what He spake were not His own words, but the Father’s (John 7:16; 8:28,40,47; 12:49; 14:10,24; 17:8).

This consists of two visions. Each is distinct and complete in itself (1. 7:1-28; 2. 8:1-27).  The dream of Nebuchadnezzar (chapter 2) was interpreted to him by Daniel; while the dream (or vision) of Daniel was interpreted to him by the Angel. The former referred to the beginning and duration of Gentile dominion over Israel; the latter concerns the end of it. 

The second (chapter 8) was given two years later than the first (chapter 7:1 with 8:1), and is subsequent to the first giving further details concerning “the latter time of their dominion” (i.e. that of the four beasts of the first vision in chapter 7). Further details are given in chapters 9, 11, and 12.

The interpretation is given in verses 17, 18; and shows that these visions (chapters 7 & 8) are still future, and are not therefore to be confounded with the dream of chapter 2. 

The interpretations given to us of these two separate visions need no further interpretation by us. The source of the dream is the source of the interpretation also. They are for us to understand and too believe. We may comment on the interpretations given, but not interpret them.

(my note, on this last paragraph is to say that I am merely speculating and commenting on this verse, not claiming I have sole interpretation. I believe it is important to think outside of the box, and be able to discuss previously held interpretations by scholars of certain passages of the Bible and question or differ from them as long as this questioning doesn’t compromise doctrine. We understand as time goes on that these previous held interpretations may have only received a partial fulfillment of the prophecy).

Bullinger continues:

Belshazzar= the last king of Babylon. Until 1854, when Sir H. C. Rawlinson discovered the cuneiform texts, all was speculation. An inscription belonging to the first year of Nabonidus, his father calls him his “firstborn son” and gives his name Bel-sarra-uzer= O Bel defend the king

There are frequent references to him in contracts and similar documents. He was the last king of Babylon. 

a dream= one of twenty recorded dreams

he wrote= This is to be noted, as it was afterward “told” in speech (verses 1,2)

the sum= substance, or the chief of the words

matters= words

vs 2= spake and said= the vision is related  in words

I saw= I was looking

by= during

the four winds= All blowing at the same time and producing the one result described in verses 3-8

strove upon= brake or burst forth against; converging on one point

the great sea= i.e. the Mediterranean Sea, or the sea, denoting the peoples of the earth, as interpreted for us in verse 17

vs 3= four great beasts= These are not the four dominions of chapter 2. They stand up one after the other, and each stands, successively, in the place of the other. These are to arise in “the days of” those last “ten kings” of Daniel 2:44. These continue the last of Nebuchadnezzar’s last dominion, and do exist together. 

I want to draw attention to these first three verses and what is happening currently regarding Russia and the Ukraine crisis. We have NATO and Russia (along with Russia’s allies in Belarus, the southern underbelly of Russia in the “stan” nations, and China) all coming to blows over control of the Ukraine.  What does this verse have to do with this current stand off? Well, we are to understand that these four beasts come on the scene at relatively the same time. They are empires that strive against each other in the last days. They exist simultaneously with the 10 kings that occupy the Gentile dominion right before Antichrist arises to power. This is told to us in Revelation 17:12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18. 

Now, there are many who speculate who the 10 kings may be. Most scholars view this to be 10 global regions. Some have postulated that it could mean 10 political heads or countries. However, we read in Revelation that these kings do not have a kingdom as a traditional king, but have a power of a king. May we need to consider 10 men who head global corporations? Some may say these are the Illuminati kings that have control over all aspects of economical transactions. These 10 kings could be Illuminati families such as the Rothschilds, or Rockefellars, or they could be heads of these NGO think tanks like George Soros, or they could be men from globalist councils that influence global policies like Klaus Schwab from the World Economic Forum. Time will tell who these 10 kings are.

This means that these powers are existing right at the time before the Tribulation and rule of Antichrist. The verses also tell us that these powers are encompassing all peoples of the earth and that they are striving with one another, in other words, there is wars and rumors of wars going on at this time. 

The conflict over Ukraine certainly involves all of Western Europe and the U.S. and the East. This is a huge group of multiethnic peoples involved in this conflict.

Bullinger continues:

vs 4= the first= Cannot be Babylon, for this had already arisen, and was within two years of its end. Daniel could not see that kingdom arise now. He had said “Thou art this head of gold”; but Nebuchadnezzar himself had been dead twenty-three years, and these are “four kings which shall arise” (verse 17). Therefore Babylon is not included. 

like= these descriptions will be easily recognized by those who shall see them arise. 

While Bullinger argues that these four beasts cannot be Babylon, as Nebuchadnezzar was long dead by this time, could it be that Babylon with America as its final fulfillment be apart of the beasts? I put forth this conjecture because Daniel had the dream during the last king of Babylon’s reign. Could it be that Joe Biden is our last president? Could it be that he is the last and final “king” of Babylon right before she is destroyed and the Antichrist arises to the scene? Many scholars have thought the lion with eagle’s wings is the British Anglo-Saxon empire that includes the United States. This alliance certainly exists today. We are intrinsically intertwined historically with England. So we have the first empire that could possibly be the Anglo-Saxon empire.

vs. 5= it raised up itself= or was made to stand

one one side= i.e. partially

three ribs= This is not interpreted by the angel. The interpretations given by man are diverse, conflict and are unnecessary. 

Many scholars have interpreted this bear to be Russia. Let us look at the three ribs in the bear’s mouth with Russia in mind as the bear. If we use the Bible as the interpretation of its own symbology, we turn to Jeremiah chapter 51 (which describes the destruction of Babylon) and look to verses 27-29. We read that in verse 27 three nations are mentioned. Ararat, Minni, and Ashchenaz. We read that these three nations need a captain appointed over them in order for them to go against the Babylon. Could these three ribs, represent these three nations?

In verse 28 we read that God prepares these nations with the kings of the Medes, the captains thereof, and all the rulers thereof. With this information in context, we understand that it is the kings of the Medes that lead this coalition. The kings of the Medes have somehow gained control of these three nations and have placed their own captains over them. Captains that answer to the kings of the Medes.

So, now we must identify the Medes, their kings, and these three nations Ararat, Minni, and Aschenaz. 

Media is an empire that was confederate with Persia. We must go back to Genesis chapter 10 which is known to be the table of nations. We find that Media is a derivative of the son of Japheth named Madai (Genesis 10:2). Many Bible scholars try to teach that Japheth fathered the Europeans. This is based upon Rabbinic writings. However, should we be basing our understanding of history based upon Rabbinical interpretation? Rabbinical writings were compiled by men who did not believe in Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ. Paul warns us in Titus 1:14 to not give heed to Jewish fables. There are also cults within Christianity that teach the lost 10 tribes of Israel are the Europeans (worldwide church of God). Paul warns in Titus as well that we are not to be engaging in foolish talk of genealogies. However, the Bible clearly states that from Noah, the three races of all mankind sprung forth to repopulate the earth post-flood. We also know that according to scripture, evolution is not truth. Some Bible teachers have argued that Europeans came from Japheth, as well as the Asiatic peoples. However, in order for this to be true, then someone had to “evolve” in order to display completely different skull formations as well as phenotype features. Some Bible teachers have argued that the Middle eastern nations which descend from Shem also fathered the Asiatic races because they are both labeled as Asia major or Asia minor land areas. However, Middle Eastern people such as Jews, Arabs, and others do not resemble Asiatics either. 

The only conclusion without having to involve the satanic theory of evolution is to understand that Shem fathered the Caucasoids, Japheth fathered the Asiatics, and Ham fathered the Blacks. There are many sub branches of ethnicity under these main branches. In fact, every job application you fill out in America groups the Middle Eastern peoples as Caucasians. How could this be so? As much as they deny it, many Middle Eastern peoples such as Jews are white skinned people with blond hair and blue eyes. Shem had many other children who were not children of Abraham. Abraham was just one family branch of Shem. Let me be clear. Europeans are of Shem, but NOT OF ABRAHAM. Scientists recognize that it is not necessarily the skin tone that defines a Caucasian, but a skull formation type.

This Bible tells us who the Medes are. They are told to us that they are the Asiatics. In truth, the Bible clearly states that the ones controlling Media are the “kings of the Medes” Jeremiah 51:11. Recent archaeological evidence suggests that the ancient Scythian’s were the kings of the Medes. The Scythians were of European descent according to some recent DNA analysis. This leads us to the fact that these eastern Europeans migrated south into the land of Media and established a ruling class over these peoples. 

We also read in Russian history that the peoples who established rule over Ukraine and Russia were the Norse, once again European people. They established a ruling class over this region. In modern times, we understand Russia to be ruled by a European white class, but within the old Soviet Union countries such as Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Georgia, are actually populated with Asiatic peoples. In fact, Siberia or eastern Russia is full of Asiatic type peoples. We also know that the Mongolian empire encompassed this same area as the land of the Medes, and they were Asiatic as well. This lines up with Modern day Russia and the leaders in Moscow being the rulers of the Medes.

Scholars have identified Ararat as ancient Armenia. We know that Armenia was an old Soviet satellite state. Here, we have a blend of Shem descended peoples and Japheth Asiatics. Armenia has close military relations with Russia still. The Russians have a military base in the city of Gyumri. There are also Russian peace keeping forces in the Lachin corridor due to their ongoing antagonisms with Azerbaijan. In 2018 Armenia experienced a revolution. These were antigovernment protests led by Nikol Pashinyan, who eventually became Prime Minister. Reforms were made to their constitution during this time weakening the strength of their President’s role and strengthening the role of their Prime Minister. The question is: is Nikol Pashinyan a western plant or a puppet of Moscow? 

Could this “velvet revolution” in Armenia been a covert coup by Russia? Or are we awaiting one in the near future? We know that this area will be controlled by Moscow before the Russians attack America the Babylon.

The ancient area of Minni is debated. There are ancient Assyrian inscriptions describing uprisings in this area that they had to quell. They were north of Iran. They could have even been north of present day Armenia, or Armenia upper. This country is currently the tiny nation of Georgia. We know Georgia to be an ex Soviet satellite state as well. Georgia and Russia have been fighting over the South Ossetia breakaway region since Georgia claimed independence in 1991. In 2008 the Russo-Georgian war occurred and in the aftermath, Russia recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia as separate republics. Since this war, Georgia has considered these two territories as occupied Georgian territories. Large numbers of people hold Russian passports in these two territories. Currently the Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili came into power recently through an election dispute in 2020. Garibashvili is a political hardliner and was privately the region adviser to the board of the CEFC China energy company. Is Garibashvili another puppet of Moscow, or was he placed by the West? 

It’s conjecture that Georgia is Minni, however it is important to note that Georgia is being considered as a potential NATO country. We know that Russia is very angry over Ukraine becoming NATO, so why wouldn’t they be just as angry if Georgia was attempting to become one too?

The last area in this verse in Jeremiah to be controlled by the kings of the Medes is Ashchenaz. This is ancient Ukraine, more specifically the ancient empire of Khazaria. According to the Bible, Ukraine will be controlled or overtaken by Moscow. It is also too coincidental that this area of Ukraine has been exposed as a corrupt nation which has laundered money for American politicians such as Hunter and Joe Biden. We also see that Jeffrey Epstein, pimp to the rich has also procured girls from this area as well. Remember when John McCain was known and photographed with the fascist members of the Svoboda party in 2013 during his trip to Kiev? 

In conclusion, the three ribs in the Russian bear mouth could very well be these three nations described above. This would explain why the bear is on its side, as if these three ribs are from its own chest. This would make sense as these three nations were once apart of the Russian bear when she was known as the U.S.S.R., but are now considered their own independent nations. We also have the clue that this Russian bear is an empire during the time of Babylon’s last king as this was when Daniel received this vision. Could this be further proof America is the Babylon and that she is in her last days? We know Russia has threatened the West with nuclear retaliation if they pursue NATO expansion into the Ukraine. Could the behavior of our current maniacal administration be explained through the lens of Scripture? Why else would Russia nuke America? There has to be a reason which will trigger Russia into launching a nuclear attack against America.

One thought on “THE BEAR AND HIS THREE RIBS-DANIEL 7:5

  1. What succinctly defines ירידות הדורות? During the Middle Ages, but in reality throughout Jewish history, assimilation to copy and embrace the foreign alien notions that emphasize Patristic authority. During the Middle Ages, Patristic authority became the dominant ideology embraced by the church and assimilated rabbis.
    The Xtian theologian Bernard of Chartres of the 1100s C.E., he described himself, together with all his peers as: “We are like dwarfs perched on the shoulders of giants. We can see more and farther than our predecessors, not indeed because of the acuteness of our own vision or bodily size, but because we are lifted up and raised on high by their gigantic stature”. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/45019613 )

    Alas this idea, it undermines and negates the Torah and Talmudic classification of law into Capital Crimes Cases, Torts: Monetary damage cases. Common Law, Statutory law, Bureaucratic Administrative law, and Constitutional law. The Torah, NaCH, and Talmud strive to imposes Court accomplished justice through lateral Common law courtrooms, based upon משלי כז:יז – ברזל בברזל יחד, ואיש יחד פני רעהו.

    Opposed to this type of legal system: Statutory Law. The latter functions as laws established by legislatures, Congresses, and Parliaments. Customary law or Minchagim, they run parallel with halachic Common Law rulings. None the less, customary law while authoritative in many instances, for example the custom of Jews wearing a kippa, its authority does not equal to the authority of Talmudic halachah. Customary laws, they tend to support prior court rulings and case common law.

    Patristic authority tends to resemble to cults which “worship” the authority of specific personalities, as occurred in Stalinist Russia and Maoist China. If foists the absurd illogic that later authorities cannot challenge opinions expressed by these earlier, more knowledgeable opinions. Reliance upon ‘Patristic authority’, confuses Common law reliance upon earlier legal precedents, with individuals who expressed those earlier legal opinions. Common law legalism centers upon Case Law rather than the persons who express the accepted Case Law opinions.

    Yet a strong case argues that the Sages, in fact did base their halachic opinions upon specific individual rabbinic opinions; Hillel vs Shammai perhaps one of the most famous examples. The delusional error made through shallow organization of the definitive Talmudic common law code, that the majority opinion authority of Hillel and all others like him, that the Talmud qualifies their opinions as a kind of Patristic authority. Torah, NaCH, Talmudic common law most emphatically does not rest upon the shoulders of giants, but rather accepted legal precedents, which stand upon the logic of the Oral Torah revelation to Moshe the prophet @ Horev. No Man qualifies as a giant vis a vis the revelation of Oral Torah logic @ Horev.

    All the sages within the Talmud qualify as talmidim of Rabbi Akiva’s פרדס logic format, which understands how to learn and understand how to use, the Oral Torah logic format revealed to Moshe the prophet. The NaCH common law codification, it defines משנה תורה as Aggaditah. Meaning, the study of prophetic mussar which defines the k’vanna of all halachic legal rulings. This scholarship culminated in the organization of a warp\weft Halachic/Aggadic common law Talmud codifications. Oral Torah logic always trumps any specific rabbinic personality because HaShem did not reveal the latter @ the revelation of the Oral Torah @ Horev.

    The משנה תורה separates Court room law, from law imposed by Legislatures. The latter imposition of laws upon society serves, so to speak, as the external shells of Torah law, by which the Ari’s mysticism classified fallen sparks – the shattered klipot. This mystic kabbalah attempts to explain evil as metaphysical barriers between ourselves and the Light of the Creator. Talmudic aggadic research, which makes a דרוש to prophetic mussar commandments, this Midrashic type of scholarship by contrast, it makes a study of the דרוש\פשט axis of פרדס in order to grasp the meaning of intent behind the משנה תורה fifth Book – understood as legislative review. Prophetic mussar, it breathes Aggadic, דרוש tohor middot of ‘life’ into the ”’shells\\forms//husks”’. Daniel’s kabbalah vision – ‘feet of clay’ mysticism – makes reference to Nebuchadnezzar’s ‘law & order’ rule over his doomed empire.

    Shortly after Napoleon freed illegally imprisoned Jewry from the Ghetto walls within European society, Reform rabbis correctly denounced the halachah codified within the Shulchan Aruch, as antiquated and irrelevant for Jews living during the modern Era. The Rambam code, upon which Karo based his later code of law, it turned Jewish law away from common law base precedent to understand the intent of a specific Case\Rule Mishna. The codes of halachah written by the B’Hag, Rif, and Rosh, for this precise reason, they always open with an explicit Case\Rule Mishna.

    The halachic rulings within their codes, they serve as precedents to understand the k’vanna of intent of that specific Case\Rule Mishna; contrast them with the statute law perversions. The Yad HaChazakah & Tur Shulchan Aruch codes of halachah. Yet these common law based codes, they require a most discerning eye. To separate like from like defines understanding. The resemblance of Common Law to statute law, hold many similarities. Both this and that minimized the names of the rabbis, who authored accepted legal opinions. But Talmudic common law stands upon the rule of precedents NOT Patristic authority which fundamentally shapes statutory law. Statutory law imposed by a specific government, later governments might continue. The criminal ‘Patriot Act’, passed by the Bush Administration; Congress, to this day, has failed to repeal.

    Common law stands and works upon a simple rule, it recognizes rabbinic modesty as the chief quality of all Torah scholarship. All the Torah common law codifications, from Torat Moshe to the Talmud – prioritize logic over law. Oral Torah logic shines, comparable to the rays of the Sun upon the earth, which gives life to all generations of bnai brit.

    The Torah, only the chosen bnai brit Cohen nation accept this Sinai\Horev revelation. It therefore does not teach a ‘Universal Faith’. It makes no attempt to convert humanity to unto this logic format, wherein the Oral Torah interprets the Written Torah. Jewish common law does not compare to the common law systems employed by foreign governments. Specifically because the latter reject the Oral Torah logic methods and formats as the basis of their respective common law legal systems. The Torah simply commands, through the 2nd Sinai revelation, that the chosen Cohen nation, that we not assimilate and embrace the culture, customs and laws established by all peoples, in all generations, who never accepted the revelation of the Torah @ Sinai\Horev.

    The crux of this single Sinai 2nd commandment, it defines the eternal struggle between the Yatzir Ha’Tov and the Yatzir Ha’Rah. Herein this author attempts to explain how the B’hag ruled the reading of Megillat Esther as a mitzva דאורייתא. Specifically it attempts to answer why the Book of Esther excludes the Name of HaShem, when all other NaCH Books – organized לשמה around the Name. Based upon the assumption that the Books of the Holy Writings, the T’NaCH framers subsumed them to the Books of the Prophets by way of Tannaic later logic developments, which amplify the instruction of how to rationally compare different precedent rulings. Obeying the 1st Sinai commandment לשמה or לא לשמה – really just that simple. The famous daughter religions which preach their ‘Universal Faith’, they read the T’NaCH לא לשמה.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s