Biblical Christianity and Islam

The main difference between Christianity and Islam 

by Robert Krisztian Janko

 When it comes to Christianity and Islam, we find that there are a number of similarities of doctrines that both religions hold. What divides the Muslim and the Christian however is their view about God. Most of the time, when it comes to Muslim-Christian dialogues the most popular and debated topics are “Is Jesus God or was He just a mere prophet?”, “Was Jesus crucified for our sins or was it just made to appear so?” and “Is the Bible the preserved Word of God or is it the Koran?”. Beside all these arguments that form the fundamentals of both religions I believe that there is a much more important topic than this.

Every single Surah (chapter) in the Koran begins by this sentence: 

“In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.” Another translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali says “In the name of Allah, Most gracious, Most Merciful”. 

As I stated above, every single chapter of the Koran begins by these words so it seems obvious that the author of the Koran wanted to emphasize this fact in a very clear way. Having said that, let us look at the definition and concept of MERCY and GRACE.

Oxford dictionary gives this definition of mercy: “compassion or forgiveness shown towards someone whom it is within one’s power to punish or harm:” In other words, it is having compassion on someone when they have done something wrong and they would deserve punishment. So, in the religious context mercy is always shown towards those who do not follow God, those who are NOT obedient to His Law.

Having established the meaning of mercy we now must look at how mercy is exercised by the God of the Koran towards the unbelievers:

Chapter 2: 81: “Yes! Whosoever earns evil and his sin has surrounded him, they are dwellers of the Fire (i.e. Hell); they will dwell therein forever.” 

Chapter 4:93 “But whoever kills a believer intentionally - his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally, and Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment.” 

Chapter 4:169 “Except the path of Hell; they will abide therein forever. And that, for Allah, is [always] easy.” 

Chapter 7:36 But those who reject Our Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and treat them with arrogance, they are the dwellers of the (Hell) Fire, they will abide therein forever. 

These are some of the verses that deal with the punishment of the unbelievers and as you have probably noticed I underlined a key word that is used in all of those passages which is the word FOREVER. The Koran says that the punishment for sinners will be eternal torture in fire, that means that according to the Koran sinners will burn forever in hell for the few years they spent on this earth rejecting Islam. Let me give you a scenario, which by no means will resemble the same 

amount of injustice but it will give you a good idea of what this involves. So, let’s say that I have an 8-year old son and one day as he is playing in the garden he picks up a hammer and he breaks the windscreen of my BMW that I had bought a week before for £50,000. You can say that it is a pretty expensive car so because of what he has done I am going to take a rod and spank him with it for a whole week. In addition to that, I do not give him food and drink I just carry on "beating" him for a whole week. Remember that I am his dad and I claim to love Him and be merciful to him however when he broke the windscreen of my car I punished him for a week. If you saw me doing that, what would you think of me as a parent? You would certainly NOT think that I love that child but more importantly you would NOT think that I am a merciful father. In fact, you would accuse me of being insane and violent.

I must emphasize that I am not against punishment but the punishment has to be just and if the person claims that he is merciful than mercy must also be exercised together with justice. To put it simply, if I live 50 years on this earth and during my whole lifetime I reject God then the maximum amount of punishment that I would deserve could not be more than 49 years. Why forty nine? Because if I was punished for 50 years than that would be the exact amount of years that I deserve so I would serve my deserved punishment and there would be no mercy exercised on the part of God. However, 49 years of burning in fire would still not be a HUGE amount of mercy because it is just a little bit less than what I deserve so when the Koran says that ““In the name of Allah, Most gracious, Most Merciful” then that would even more reduce the length of the punishment because Allah claims to be the MOST merciful. Unfortunately, we can see clear from the above Surahs that I have recited that such is not the case. The punishment of eternal torturing in fire is not only unjust but the exact opposite of merciful, namely cruel.

What about the Bible then? Many Christians today hold on to this very same idea and this is the reason why so many people throughout the centuries have given up on God. The Bible speaks of a punishment but is it taking place at this very moment or is it going to take place at a certain time in the future?

1 “The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to RESERVE the unjust unto the Day of Judgment to be punished.” 2Peter 2:9 (The day of judgment must arrive before the retribution of the ungodly.)

2. “The heavens and the earth which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” 2Peter 3:7. (The perdition of ungodly men comes at the judgment.)

3. “The wicked is RESERVED unto the day of destruction they shall be brought forth to the day of wrath.” Job 21:30

From all this, and many more bible verses we can see that those who have died so far and were not righteous are NOT being punished at the moment because the verses say that they are being preserved to the day of judgement when they will receive their punishments.

What then, will be the end of the ungodly men?

Psalm 37:38: “But all sinners will be destroyed; the future of the wicked will be cut off.”

Malachi 4:1: “For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.”

Some more references: John 3:16, Romans 6:23, Ezekiel 18:20 (all of these verses show that God’s gift is eternal life but if we don’t accept that then we will DIE. Notice the contrast is not between eternal life in heaven and eternal life on earth, it is between Life and DEATH so by implication death cannot be suffering eternally in hell because that is still LIFE but only those have life who accept God)

Due to the limited time and space I have, I cannot go into any more detail but those two scriptures summarize well what the bible says on this topic. The last book in the Bible and the Book of Isaiah in the Old Testament talk about the fact that when God destroys sin and sinners He will create a new heaven and a new earth and the Bible says:

Revelation 21:4 “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.”

If at this time, sinners were burning in hell then this text would be a lie as it says that there will be no more SORROW and CRYING so by this time all the wicked will have been destroyed in the lake of fire and they will have ceased to exist.

In conclusion, I did not have the privilege of growing up in a Christian home because I have experienced things that I should never have experienced but the few times I spoke to Christians it pushed me even further from religion because it seemed that I as a human being was more loving and more caring than the God that was presented to me so if I had not found this amazing truth in the bible that God will not burn people forever, I would never have become a follower of Christianity or Islam. Some of the Muslims, do not really consider this as a good argument because all of their families are in the same faith, so they do not have to imagine what will happen if their children or their parents do not make it to heaven, however most of my family do not care about God and if God did not deal with them justly I would be the greatest follower of people like Professor Richard Dawkins or Peter Atkins who are “fighting” against religions because of this very reason. Can you imagine humans having more compassion on their friends and families than their very own creator? Praise the Lord, that I have found the truth and that I serve a God who says: “... As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked” How long does God live? FOREVER, so that means He will forever be sad for those who have never made it to heaven but have died.

God's Love for man by Daniel Webber

                                                      Nature’s Apocalypse

“When through the woods and forest glades I wander,
and hear the birds sing sweetly in the trees;
when I look down from lofty mountain grandeur,
and hear the brook, and feel the gentle breeze;

Then sings my soul, my Saviour God; to thee,
How great thou art, how great thou art!
Then sings my soul, my Saviour God; to thee,
How great thou art, how great thou art!” Hine S, 1899

How is it that we as humans find something so beautiful in nature; from the large mountains, to the sea, to the flowers and everything else fills us with a sense of awe? The hymn writer is bedazzled by its effortless beauty, how at their very own heart, they find comfort and peace whilst in it.  Creatures as small as birds can inspire nations, take for example the United States of America, whose emblem is the bold eagle or Russia whose emblem is the Bear or the United Kingdom who have many national animals such as the Lion and the Welsh Dragon.

After examining the beautiful things in nature the songwriter exclaims how great God is, their soul could not contain the wonder, not just of nature, but of a transcendent mind behind it. Woah woah woah, surely nature says nothing about anything transcendent. Surely, theists force their view upon everyone else, just like trying to convince a friend of the shape of a cloud in the sky. The songwriter suggests that the ‘creation’ reveals the hands of the creator as a watch indicates of a designer. But was the conclusion justified? Does nature really reveal to us the hands of a creator?

Interestingly enough, this same ridiculous claim is found in the bible. “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:  21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.  22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.  24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:  25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” Romans 1:20-25

The passage says something almost paradoxical, that the “invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen”. ‘GOD’ seems to explain that those things that have been created reveal himself, that no-one who looks at the beauty without presuppositions will exclaim the randomness of this purposeful wonder. The famed atheist Anthony Flew who was at the helm of confronting theism for decades published a book titled ‘There is a God: How the world’s most notorious Atheist changed his mind’ in which he said 

      “My departure from atheism was not occasioned by any new phenomenon or argument. Over the last two decades, my whole framework of thought has been in a state of migration. This was a consequence of my continual assessment of the evidence of nature. When I finally came to realise the existence of a God, it was not a paradigm shift, because my paradigm remains, as Plato in his Republic scripted his Socrates to insist “We must follow the argument wherever it leads.” Flew A, 2009, p89. Flew, like Hines attributed the natural to the supernatural simply through observing nature.

This overwhelming revelation of a creator can be so powerful that it is written that “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved” Crick F, 1988, p138. This ‘feeling’ must be so inescapable that Biologists are instructed to constantly keep evolution in their minds no matter what intuition tells them. So was God right? Was this a legitimate claim?

Coincidentally, another answer comes to us from the same text in Romans 1v 23,25, which says:

    “23 And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.…..25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.”  History is littered with the idea of homosapien’s exalting themselves to the place of Deity, whether it be through religions such as in ancient Egypt, where Pharaoh’s ruled as Gods on earth or to what we can consider more ‘spiritual’, meaning, putting ourselves before God and our fellow men because we have a desire to be adored. We see so much wickedness that happens around us, from people being killed, to people being abused and the denying of basic rights as humans we need. A major problem is, is that when we “change the truth of God into a lie” we then have to deny ‘creation’ and are forced accept ‘nature’, and acts of cruelty, reduce down to primal instincts in which we are destined to repeat.

In a book called Steps to Christ, the first Chapter tells us that nature seems to testify of God’s love, the things that have been created have been wonderfully adapted to meet the needs of man and all living creatures; the rain that brings life to the earth through refreshing the lands, the sun that punctures warmth to the most impenetrable of places (White E, 2010).

I believe that there is compelling evidence that reveals to us a creator, but I believe that although he has revealed himself not just through nature but through the bible, history, archaeology, prophecy, there are points in which we can hang our doubt. But there is a point where evidence has to transition to faith and God calls us to search for him and he promises that if we do search for him with our whole heart, we will find him (Jeremiah 29:13).

References:

Crick F, 1988, What mad pursuit: a personal view of science discovery, Penguin Books, London, p138

Hine S, 1899, Seventh-Day Adventist Hymnal, no.86

Flew A, 2009, There is a God: How the world’s most notorious Atheist changed his mind, HarperCollins, USA, p89

White E, 2010, Steps to Christ, Lincolnshire, Stanborough Press Ltd

Questions on immortality of the soul

10 Objections to the immortality of the soul

(excerpts from an article called "Appeal on Immortality" written by Elder James White)

 

 

1. Is it reasonable to suppose that God created man

an immortal being, and yet never once in his holy word
informed us of the fact?

2. Is it reasonable to suppose that if man naturally

possessed immortality, God’s word would recommend
us to seek for it, as it does in Rom. 2:7?

3. Is it reasonable to suppose, that if men were naturally

immortal, God’s word would so plainly assure usthat “God only hath immortality?” 1 Tim. 6:16.

4. Is it not far more reasonable to believe that immortality

is the gift of God through Jesus Christ our

Lord? Rom. 6:23.

5. Is is reasonable to suppose that words, when

found in the Bible, must have a meaning attached to
them, which no man in his senses would ever think
of attaching to them in any other book? For instance,the words Life and Death, when found in the Bible,
must (as theologians tell us) mean happiness and misery;
but, if found in any other book in the world, they
would simply mean “Existence” and “Cessation of existence.”

6. Is it reasonable to suppose that in all the vast

multitude of passages in which Christ promised Life,
Eternal Life, to his followers, he did not literally mean
what he said? This he could not, if all men have immortal
life by nature. In that case the wicked will live
through eternity as well as the righteous.

7. Is it reasonable to suppose, in all the vast multitude

of passages in which Death is threatened as the
punishment of the sinner, that loss of happiness is all
that is meant? An unhappy man is as truly alive as the
most happy being in existence; and if he be immortal
by nature, will continue alive through all eternity. In
no plain, common-sense language can any immortalbeing be said to suffer Death.

8. Is it reasonable to believe that men go to heaven

or hell immediately at death, and then hundreds
or thousands of years afterward are taken out to be
judged, and to see which they deserve to be sent to?
Should we deem it right to send a man to the State’s
prison for ten years, and then bring him out for trial to
see if he deserved such a punishment? And “shall not
the Judge of all the earth do right?”

9. Is it reasonable to believe in the eternal torment

of the wicked, when more than two hundred passages
of Scripture plainly affirm that they shall “die,” be
“consumed,” “devoured,” “destroyed,” “burnt up,” be
as though they had not been,” etc.? 

10. Is it reasonable that such prominence should be

given in Scripture to the doctrine of the resurrection
from the dead, if that event only means a “re-union”
of a lump of clay, with the conscious thinking and real
man—the soul; and which is said by theologians to be
as capable of happiness or misery, without the body
as with it?    

The Law of God in reformation Church Creeds

The Waldensian Catechism

"The Waldensian Catechism ... must have been written before 1500.... It consists of fifty-seven

questions.... and as many answers. ... It embodies the Apostles' Creed, the Lord's prayer, and the
Ten Commandments.... Under the head of Faith we have a practical exposition of the Apostles' Creed
and the Ten Commandments, showing their subjective bearing on a living faith." - Volume 1, pp. 572, 573.
"9. What is living faith?
"It is faith active in love (as the apostle testifies, Gal. 5:15), that is, by keeping God's
commandments. Living faith is to believe in God, that is, to love Him and to keep His commandments."-Ibid., p. 575.

The Confession of the Waldenses, AD. 1655

"This confession belongs to the Calvinistic family.... It is still in force, or at least highly prized

among the Waldenses in Italy. The occasion which called it forth entitles it to special consideration. It
was prepared and issued in 1655, together with an appeal to Protestant nations, in consequence of one
of the most cruel persecutions which Roman bigotry could inspire." - Volume 3, p. 757.
"We believe, . . .
        -XXXIII. Finally, that we ought to receive the symbol of the apostles, the Lord's prayer, and
the decalogue as fundamentals of our faith and our devotion. "-Ibid., p. 768.

 

Luther's Small Catechism, AD. 1529

 

Speaking of this catechism in connection with the Heidelberg and the Shorter Westminster

Catechisms, Schaff says: ... These are the three most popular and useful catechisms that Protestantism
has produced." - Volume 1, p. 543. Part 1 is entitled "The Ten Commandments," consisting chiefly of a series of questions on each of the Ten Commandments in order. Then follow immediately the two
questions and answers given below.
"What does God say about all these commandments?
"He says this:
“I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children
unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them
hat love Me and keep My commandments.'
"What does this mean?
"Answer:
"God threatens to punish all who transgress these commandments: we should, therefore, fear
His anger, and do nothing against such commandments. But He promises grace and every blessing to
all who keep them: we should, therefore, love and trust in Him, and gladly obey His commandments." -
Volume 3, p. 77.

The Form (or Formula) of Concord, AD. 1577

 

"The last of the Lutheran Confessions The Formula of Concord is, next to the Augsburg

Confession, the most important theological standard of the Lutheran Church, but differs from it as the
sectarian symbol of Lutheranism, while the other is its catholic symbol." - Volume 1, pp. 258, 338. The object of this Formula was to bring harmony into Lutheranism after some thirty years of theological disputation. Among the many questions raised by various theologians was that of the proper relation of the law to the gospel. Schaff well observes in this connection: -Protestantism in its joyful enthusiasm for the freedom and all-sufficiency of the gospel, was strongly tempted to antinomianism [no-law-ism], but restrained by its moral force and the holy character of the gospel itself." - lbid., p. 277. The following quotation from the Formula of Concord shows how clearly and how vigorously the no-law doctrine was repudiated:  

The New Hampshire Baptist Confession, AD. 1833

 

"Widely accepted by the Baptists, especially in the Northern and Western States. . . . The text

is taken from the 'Baptist Church Manual,' published by the American Baptist Publication Society,

Philadelphia.' - Ibid., p. 742.

246

 

XIL - OF THE HARMONY OF THE LAW AND THE GOSPEL

 

"We believe that the law of God is the eternal and unchangeable rule of His moral

  

government. [1] That it is holy, just, and good. [2] And that the inability which the Scriptures ascribe to

fallen men to fulfill its precepts arises entirely from their love of sin. [3] To deliver them from which,

 
 

and to restore them through a Mediator to unfeigned obedience to the holy law, is one great end of the

 

gospel, and of the means of grace connected with the establishment of the visible church. [4] "-Ibid., p.

 
 

746. 

Daniel 2: Biblical Prophecy and the reliability of Scripture

       The Best Argument for Christianity and the Bible part 1

by Robert K. Janko

Unbelievers often challenge Christians to give them evidence for the existence of God and for the validity of their religion. I, now, am going to be discussing two of the most convincing arguments that prove Christianity to be true. The first part of the article will be looking at Biblical prophecies and their fulfilments specifically a prophecy from the book of Daniel and revelation. The second part will be about the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. Hope you will find it helpful when dealing with Atheists, Muslims, Agnostics etc...

1,  Biblical prophecies confirm the inspiration of the Holy Bible and the existence of God


In the Holy Bible, we read:  "Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, (Isaiah 46:9) "

God here is making a very bold claim. He says, there is NO ONE like Him. The obvious question we then need to ask is "why isn't there anyone like God?". Well, the verse next verse in the same chapter will tell us the answer. "Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure (Isaiah 46:10)"
So, the reason God gives to back up His claim from verse 9 is that He is able to tell what is going to happen in the future. It makes good sense though, as if we believe that God exist outside of time then it makes sense that He is able to tell in advance what's going to happen.

Having established this, we now proceed to investigate if there are any prophecies in the Bible that would confirm this claim from Isaiah 46:9.

Unsurprisingly, there are NUMEROUS prophecies in both the OLD and NEW testaments that can be cited in support of God's unique ability to tell the future.
 Biblical prophecies from the books of Daniel and Revelation:

1, Daniel chapter two: The king of Babylon has a dream one night and in the morning he is troubled as he cannot remember the dream. In those ancient cultures, dreams had great importance and so the king decided to call all the magicians, astrologers, sorcerers in hope that they might be able not only to interpret his dream but to tell what the dream was about as the king had forgotten it. Seeing the absurdity of the king's desire they said to the king "The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said, There is not a man upon the earth that can shew the king's matter: therefore there is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such things at any magician, or astrologer, or Chaldean. (Daniel 2:10)".
They further said
" it is a rare thing that the king requires, and there is none other that can show it before the king, except the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh. or this cause the king was angry and very furious, and commanded to destroy all the wise men of Babylon. And the decree went forth that the wise men should be slain; and they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain. (Daniel 2:11-13)

The magicians realised that it was impossible for them what the king had dreamt so they told the king that no man can tell such thing. Humans don't have the ability to know the thoughts of others (Thank God) so the king got angry and commanded that all the wise man in Babylon be killed. Verse 13 specifically mentions a person called Daniel. He was a young Jewish boy who had been taken to Babylon as captive when King Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem. In Daniel Chapter one we read that Daniel had been educated in Babylon and became one of the wise man in the empire due to his excellent talents. He was a faithful believer in the God of the Jews and so He did not conform to the ways of the Babylonians. To cut the long story short, He told the king that if he was given time he would be able to find out what the king's dream was. He came together with his three Jewish friends and prayed to their God that He would make known to them the dream. Sure enough, God gave them the king's dream together with the interpretation. We can read the actual dream in Daniel 2:31-34. It says "Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible.  This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass,  His legs of iron, his feet part of iron and part of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces" 

 



As you can see, different parts of the body are made up of different types of metals. They all represent something and have a meaning.
Having seen and read the actual dream, it's now time to go and read the interpretation of all this because at the moment it does not seem like anything amazing let alone something that would be appealing to someone who does not believe in God or the Bible.

Daniel 2:36-38 "This is the dream; and we will tell the interpretation thereof before the king. Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold."

We now have the interpretation of the first part of the image. When Daniel says "Thou are this head of gold" he is speaking to Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon. So the "head of gold" symbolises the Kingdom of Babylon  with its head as King Nebuchadnezzar.

Let us now continue on with the interpretation and let's read what the breast and arms of silver and the thighs of brass symbolise. Daniel 2:39 "And after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee, and another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth." Verse 39 begins by saying that "after thee shall arise another kingdom" and then a third which is represented by the brass on the image. By implication the "another" kingdom is the one that is symbolized by silver. So far we have seen 3 kingdoms mentioned.

1. Babylon
2. "Another kingdom after thee"
3. A Third kingdom

In addition to this, we still have parts of the image that we still have not seen the interpretation of.
Daniel 2:40 "And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.  "
We now have the interpretation of the legs on iron and we see that it will be another 4th kingdom.

We now have an outline of the prophecy :

1. Kingdom of Babylon
2. "another kingdom after thee"
3. a third kingdom
4. fourth kingdom

The prophecy predicted the rise and fall of four WORLD RULING EMPIRES as it says in verse 39 that they "shall bear rule over all the earth". The prophecy was written during the period that the kingdom of Babylon ruled the world and it stated that it would not rule forever but that it would be taken over by another kingdom. It further prophesized that the second kingdom (the one after Babylon) would also be taken over by a third kingdom and that by a fourth.
All we need to do now is to check whether HISTORY confirms this or not.

According to History, Babylon was a glorious kingdom that was defeated and conquered by the Medo-Persian Empire. Medo-Persia then was conquered by the Greek Empire under the leadership of Alexander the Great. Alexander's empire however did not stay in power forever as we all know. They were defeated by the pagan Roman Empire.
What is incredible about this prophecy is that each kingdom  discussed above  were GREAT kingdoms with enormous power. To suggest that the kingdom of Babylon would fall into the hands of an inferior nation (verse 39)  would have seem absurd and ridiculous. It would have been the equivalent of saying that America today will be taken over by Holland or Hungary or any of these "small" countries.

Notice, the prophecy's take however on the fall of the fourth empire. Notice it DOES NOT SAY "after that shall arise a FIFTH kingdom". The prophecy, very interestingly, did not say that this fourth kingdom would be taken over by ANOTHER empire.
So, what did the prophecy say about the rule and fall of this kingdom? Was it to rule the world forever? Let's find out what the prophecy says and then see if HISTORY will confirm or disprove the Biblical account.

Daniel 2:41 "And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters' clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay."

Interestingly, the Bible predicted that the Roman Empire would NOT be defeated by someone but rather that it would be DIVIDED.  Everyone who has studied the fall of Rome knows that the empire started to decline and as a result the emperor Diocletian divided the Roman Empire to two. So the Roman Empire became divided into Western-Roman Empire and Eastern-Roman Empire in AD 284. For more information on the fall of Rome go on this website: http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/fall_of_ancient_rome.htm

Amazingly, the prophecy has proven to be true. It said that Babylon would not rule the world forever in spite of its greatness but that it would be conquered by another empire, the Medo-Persians and it did. It predicted that Medo-Persia would likewise be taken over and be defeated,by another kingdom which was Greek empire, and it did. It further stated that Greek empire would also fall and be defeated by another empire, which was the Romans, and it DID. Finally, it said that Rome would NOT be defeated but that it would be DIVIDED and remain up until the end of time. (The stone from the dream would "smote the image upon his feet " verse 34 which refers to the end of time when God will set up His kingdom which would never FALL.Daniel 2:44-45) ) ALL of this was written down hundreds of years prior to the events of the prophecy.

This has been a short and brief study on the second chapter from the book of Daniel. I will also be writing an article in defence of the historicity of the book of Daniel and specifically this prophecy which will be dealing  with some of the objections to the prophecy.

Look out for parts 2 and 3 of this series!!!