Commentary on Daniel

Eusebius of Caesarea (260–339)

And it was fitting that the king, who prized the substances deemed precious among people, gold, and silver, and brass and iron, should identify these substances as the kingdoms that held sovereignty at different times in the life of humankind; but that the prophet should describe these same kingdoms under the likeness of beasts, in accordance with the manner of their rule. And again, the king—who was puffed up, so it appears, in his own conceit and prided himself on the power of his ancestors—is shown the vicissitude to which affairs are subject and the end destined for all the kingdoms of the earth. This is done in order to teach him humility and understand that there is nothing lasting among people but only that which is appointed the end of all things—the kingdom of God.

For instance, Daniel the prophet, under the influence of the divine Spirit, seeing his kingdom at the end of time, was inspired thus to describe the divine vision in language fitted to human comprehension.… It is clear that these words can refer to no one else than to our Savior, the Word who was in the beginning with God, and who was called the Son of man because of his final appearance in the flesh.

See also

• More works by Eusebius of Caesarea

Enable JavaScript to read the full text and search the library.