One of the most contentious debates in biblical prophecy centers on a seemingly simple structural question: Why is the Little Horn not attached to a beast in Daniel 8?
This question is often a focal point of disagreement between Seventh-day Adventist and Evangelical/Catholic scholars regarding the identity of the little horn.
As Adventists, our traditional interpretation identifies the two-horned ram as the Medo-Persian Empire, the goat represents Greece under Alexander the Great, and the four horns that emerge represent the four divisions of Alexander's kingdom after his death. Finally, the Little horn in Daniel 8 is seen as a symbol of the Roman Empire in both its Pagan and Papal phases.
However, because the Little Horn lacks its own beast, critics analyzing this chapter claim that the Little Horn is still connected to the preceding goat (Greece). This detail would then make the Little Horn a Greek ruler rather than a Roman one. This line of reasoning is one of the main reasons why Evangelicals and Catholics are convinced that the Little Horn represents the Greek ruler of the Seleucid Empire—Antiochus Epiphanes.
Although I can see the logic in this reasoning, I believe Evangelicals hold this view and Adventists sometimes experience difficulty in explaining the absence of a Beast because both sides are interpreting the Little Horn in Daniel 7 independently of the Little Horn in Daniel 8. I call this "prophetic isolation."
The Problem of Prophetic Isolation
"Prophetic isolation" is the tendency to interpret Daniel chapters 7 and 8 as disconnected narratives rather than understanding them as complementary prophecies that follow the biblical principle of "repeat and expand." Unfortunately, most explanations of these two chapters use a level of isolation in their interpretations.
Let's look at the horns:
- In Daniel 7, the Ten Horns are generally interpreted as ten divisions of the Roman Empire
- In Daniel 8, they are obviously symbolized as the kings of world superpowers
This isolated interpretation continues into the Little Horn:
- In Daniel 7, the Little Horn is generally interpreted as the Papacy
- In Daniel 8, the Little Horn is interpreted as Antiochus Epiphanes by Evangelicals, or Pagan and Papal Rome by Adventists.
In essence, whether we are Adventist or Evangelical, we are isolating the symbols and interpreting them independently of their correlating visions. As a Seventh-day Adventist, I believe that this isolation of the horns in Daniel 7 and 8 is due to us inadvertently not utilizing repeat and expand when it comes to the Little Horn. Let's try to see the correlation between the Little Horn in both of these chapters.
Historical Context of the little horn and the Three subdued horns
Understanding the actual historical progression of Alexander's divided kingdom is crucial to resolving the correlation between Daniel 7 and 8. While Alexander's empire was initially divided into four parts among his generals, the political landscape had changed significantly by the time Rome emerged as a world power.
According to the historical record, by 281 BC, the Seleucid Empire had conquered the territory of Lysimachus (Asia Minor), consolidating power and reducing the number of major Greek kingdoms to three. Thus, by the time Rome entered into the divided Greek kingdom, there were only three main dynasties ruling:
- Antigonos - Macedonia (Western division)
- Ptolemy - Egypt (Southern division)
- Seleucus - Syria and the East (Northern and Eastern divisions)
This historical reality provides crucial context for understanding Daniel 7:24, which specifically states that "the little horn shall subdue three kings" —not four. Thus, you should be able to see that Rome's rise to world dominance came through conquering these three remaining divisions of the Greek Empire.
Daniel 8 repeats and expands on this narrative when it says, "And out of one of them came forth a little horn, which waxed exceeding great, toward the south, and toward the east, and toward the pleasant land." (vs. 9)
The phrase "out of one of them" represents a cardinal direction – specifically the west. This geographical detail makes perfect sense when applied to Rome:
- Rome could not logically come from the south (Egypt) and then wax great towards the south.
- Rome could not emerge from the east (Syria) and then and then wax great towards the east.
- Rome was located west of the divided Greek territories.
If you read my article series on the Ten Kingdoms, you will see that the narrative of Daniel 7 is that the fourth Beast and the Ten Horns represent the world. Thus, in order to introduce the Little Horn, the prophecy presents the fourth Beast as a compilation of all the world's superpowers in one kingdom. John the Revelator expands on this fact when he saw this same kingdom symbolized as a Beast that was "like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion." What both visions reveal to us is that Rome, as an amalgamation of all the world powers, is prophetically shown housing the Ten Kingships that existed before it. However, only three of those kingships were directly destroyed by Rome. The other seven horns were prophetically absorbed by Rome as a result of it conquering the known world. Daniel 7 gives us ten horns at once, but Daniel 8 further breaks this down by properly showing us how a number of these horns are allocated to their corresponding empire. Thus, we understand two of the ten horns are allocated to Medo-Persia, and five are allocated to Greece.
Now that we have laid the foundation that correlates the horns in Daniel 7 and 8, we are better equipped to answer the question at hand.
Why is the Little Horn is without a Beast in Daniel 8?
In studying this prophecy, I now understand that the absence of a beast for the Little Horn in Daniel 8 is the nature of the narrative that was presented in Daniel 7.
In prophecy, horns typically represent the source of power for a nation. We typically interpret a horn as a king. (see Daniel 8:20-21). Understanding this fact, we see that in Daniel 7, the first three beasts (lion, bear, leopard) have no horns. Now let me ask you a question: Are we to interpret the lack of horns in Daniel 7 to suggest that the first three beasts had no kings? Of course not. Daniel 7's prophecy determined that the kings Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece weren't relative to the narrative it wanted to convey. Each nation was the focus, not their kings.
Similarly, in Daniel 8, the little horn has no beast because the beast is not relevant to this chapter's focus. The focus is on the Little Horn itself. But why is this is this the case?
The Battle Is in the horns
In Daniel 7, you should see that there are no wars amongst the beasts in this prophecy. Although history tells us that each of these powers was conquered by its successor, the prophecy omits this fact from its narrative. However, there is a place in this chapter where political conquest is expressed. Notice what the Bible says:
And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings. Daniel 7:24
Now, you should see that the only place where we see this political conquest in this chapter is in the horns!
In this manner, we can begin to see that the horns are where war and conquests often originate from. Notice how the horns are portrayed in Revelation 17:
And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful. Revelation 17:12-14
And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. Revelation 17:16
Hopefully, you can see that the war is in the horns. Now, with this context, notice that in Daniel 8, when you have the beasts with horns, you now see conquest and war!
When you get to the Little Horn in Daniel 8, it simply expands on the narrative of Daniel 7. It introduces Rome through the lens of Daniel 7 and we are seen how the Little Horn destroyed the three horns.
This explains the focus of the horns, but now we need an answer for the lack of a Beast.
Rome doesn't have its own beast
The lack of a beast in Daniel 8 under the era of the Little Horn can be puzzling, but it's easier to understand once you realize Rome didn't have its own beast. I can better explain this through a hypothetical question a friend of mine once asked me.
A few years ago, someone asked me, if I could make myself into the perfect basketball player, what parts would I adopt as my own. I thought about this for a minute and I told him I would like Michael Jordan's legs, Shaq's body, Lebron James' arms, Kyrie Irving's hands, Kobe Byrant's face, and Russell Westbrook's heart. My player ended up looking something like this:
You may dispute the players and the parts of them that I have chosen, but what you cannot dispute is that this player is technically no longer me. Essentially, every part of this player is someone else, thus, they are me.
In the same manner that I am no longer me because all my parts are from someone else, we should be able to see that the fourth Beast in Daniel 7 doesn't have its own parts.
Because Daniel 7 doesn't give an animalistic description of the fourth beast, we often call it the "Non-descript Beast." However, John the Revelator's vision of this same beast was able to give it a description. Notice how he described it:
And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. Revelation 13:2
Here, we we can see that just like I was technically all the other players combined, Rome was prophetically all the previous powers combined. It is in this manner that Rome didn't have its own beast. In essence, Rome looked like Greece, moved like Medo-Persia, and spoke like Babylon.
Now, when we look at the Little Horn in Daniel 8, we should see that the narrative of this prophecy focuses on the Little Horn while omitting its Beast because Rome technically doesn't have its own Beast. Rome is the Goat and the Ram. Rome is the Bear Lion and Leopard. Thus, all that is relevant is the horn.
The prophetic narrative of beastless Horns
Many of our critics argue that prophetic horns must always be attached to beasts, but the Scriptures reveal that this is a misnomer. Zechariah 1:18-19 presents a vision of four horns that appear without any beasts:
Then lifted I up mine eyes, and saw, and behold four horns. And I said unto the angel that talked with me, What be these? And he answered me, These are the horns which have scattered Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem.
This biblical precedent demonstrates that prophetic horns can exist independently of a beast when the narrative requires it. This same concept applies to the Little Horn in Daniel 8.
Conclusion
The Little Horn in Daniel 8 requires no beast because the prophetic narrative focuses on the point of conquest between the Little Horn and the three subdued horns. Understanding the connection between Daniel 7 and 8 through the principle of "repeat and expand" reveals that both chapters present the same prophetic concepts from different perspectives. The Papacy is always introduced via its predecessor, Imperial Rome. Thus, the Little Horn always represents both phases of the Roman power, and both chapters present its conquest of the three remaining divisions of Alexander's empire.
