Seventh Day Adventist commentators on Daniel 11 (summarized)
by koot van wyk Seoul, South Korea, 2019
Uriah Smith (1881)
11:1 Darius
11:2 Xerxes
11:3 Alexander the Great
11:4
11:5 Palestine the center from which wind-directions are calculated (page
236)
king of south = Egypt one of his princes = seleucus nicator
11:6 king of the north = Antiochus Theos king of the south = Ptolemy
Philadelphus (page 237)
11:7 Ptolemy Euergetes (page 238)
11:8
11:9
11:10 Seleucus Callinicus sons were Seleucus Ceraunus and Antiochus
Magnus
11:11 king of the South = Ptolemy Philopator (page 240) king of the
North = Antiochus Magnus
11:12
11:13
11:14 robbers of they people = Rome (page 243)
to establish the vision = Romans
11:15 Romans involved but king of the North is Antiochus
11:16 Pompey 63 BCE (page 247)
11:17 Julius Ceasar, Cleopatra and Ptolemy daughter of women = Cleopatra
11:18
11:19 Julius Caesar and the fort of the own land = Rome (page 252)
11:20 Augustus Octavius = the raiser of taxes
11:21 vile person = Tiberius in 14 CE to the power of Rome
11:22 prince of the covenant = Christ in 31 CE (page 256-257) See page
255.
11:23 return (!) to description of 161 BCE (page 258) "he [Daniel]
takes us back to the time when the Romans became directly connected with the
people of God by the Jewish league in 161 B.C."
11:24 Roman conquest of Palestine etc. "even for a time = 360
years" (page 260).
11:25 Rome against king of the south [Egypt thus Smith] at battle of
Actium (2nd September 31 BCE) against Antony, Egypt and Cleopatra (page 261).
Thus 31 BCE + 360 years = 330 CE. Seat of Rome move to Constantinople 330 CE.
11:26 Antony was deserted (page 263).
11:27 "both these kings" = Antony and Augustus (page 263).
11:28 "return 1" Augusts after his expedition against Egypt
and Antony "return 2" Vespasian of Rome 70 CE (page 265).
11:29 "At the time appointed" = 330 CE [see U. Smith verse 24]
page 266.
11:30 "shall come against him" Barbarians invaded Roman empire
(page 267). Kittim = coasts and islands of the Mediteranean. "He shall
return" Genseric (428-477 CE). "Indignation against the holy
covenant" Justinian, Rome, since the Heruli, Goths and Vandals were of the
Arian faith and Justinian decreed the pope to correct the heretics. The Bible
was regarded as a dangerous book. "The man of sin was raised to his
presumptuous throne by the defeat of the Arian Goths. who held possession of
Rome in A.D. 538" (page 269). [note Uriah Smith's understanding of the
"Little Horn" as applicable in this passsage].
11:31 Papacy took away the daily (page 270). "It seems clear
therefore that the "daily" desolation was paganism, and the
"abomination of desolation" is the papacy. But it may be asked, How
can this be the papacy since Christ spoke of it in connection with the
destruction of Jerusalem? The answer is, Christ evidently referred to Daniel 9,
which predicts the destruction of Jerusalem, and not to this verse in Daniel
11, which does not refer to that event. In the ninth chapter, Daniel speaks of
desolations and abominations in the plural. More than one abomination,
therefore, treads down the church; that is, as far as the church is concerned,
both paganism and the papacy are abominations. But as distinguished from each
other, the language is restricted. One is the "daily" desolation, and
the other is pre-eminently the transgression of "abomination" of
desolation." pages 270-271. "daily taken away" in 508 CE (page
273).
11:32 Waldenses and Albigenses (page 279).
11:33 1260 years persecution (page 270).
11:34 Reformation Martin Luther "they shall be helped" (page
279).
11:35 "Time of the end" 1798 CE "The conclusion would be
equally evident that this taking away of papal supremacy would mark the
beginning of the period here called the "time of the end." If this
application is correct, the time of the end began in 1798; for then, as already
noticed, the papacy was overthrown by the French, and has never since been able
to wield all the power it before possessed." page 279.
11:36 "King" not papacy. "The king here introduced cannot
denote the same power that was last noticed, namely, the papal power; for the
specifications will not hold good if applied to that power." page 280.
11:37 French Revolution page 281.
11:38 Secularism
11:39 "god of forces" "Liberty and country were at first
the objects of adoration. "Liberty, equality, virtue, and morality,"
the very opposites of anything the possessed in fact or exhibited in practice,
were words which they set forth as describing the deity of the nation. In 1793
the worship of the Goddess of Reason was introduced ...." (page 286).
"strange god" = goddess of reason (page 287)
11:40 king of the south = Egypt; king of the north = Turkey; him =
Napoleon Bonaparte (page 290). "Thus the king of the north (Turkey) came
against him (France) in the same year that the king of the south (Egypt)
"pushed," and both "at the time of the end." (page 293).
11:41 Jordan (Ammon Edom and Moab) escaped Turkish onslaught (page 295).
11:42 Napoleon (page 296).
11:43 Mohammed Ali as Turkish governor after French defeat of Egypt
(page 297).
11:44 North (Turkey? Smith not sure) England and France came to Turkey's
rescue, thus a confusing picture, see Uriah Smith page 298.
11:45 "He shall come to his end" = king of the north
(territory of king of the north) Uriah Smith uncertain "Just how and when
and where his end will come, we may watch with solemn interest, knowing that
the hand of Providence guides the destiny of nations." page 299.
12:1 Time of trouble
12:2 Jesus comes
12:3 Resurrection
Gerhard Pfandl (2004)
"The visions in Daniel 2, 7, and 8 mention a succession of kingdoms
from the Babylonian kingdom to the kingdom of God at the end of time. We should
expect, then, that the last vision in Daniel (11:1-12:4) which also deals with
a succession of political kingdoms could cover approximately the same time span
as the previous visions." (Source: Gerhard Pfandl, Adult Sabbath School
Bible Study Guide on Daniel. Silver Spring, MD: Office of the Adult Bible Study
Guide, General Conference of Seventh Day Adventists, October-December 2004.
ISBN 1096-7400. No. 438)
11:1 Darius the Mede (page 100 assumed).
11:2 Xerxes 486-465 BCE (page 100 assumed).
11:3 Alexander the Great (page 100).
11:4 Alexander the Great 323 BCE (page 100).
11:5 UNCLEAR but in context of successors of Alexander (page 100).
11:6 UNCLEAR but in context of successors of Alexander (page 100).
11:7 UNCLEAR but in context of successors of Alexander (page 100).
11:8 UNCLEAR but in context of successors of Alexander (page 100).
11:9 UNCLEAR but in context of successors of Alexander (page 100).
11:10 Seleucus II sons were Seleucus III and Antiochus III (page 287)
11:11 UNCLEAR but in context of successors of Alexander (page 100).
11:12 UNCLEAR but in context of successors of Alexander (page 100).
11:13 UNCLEAR but in context of successors of Alexander (page 100).
11:14 "robbers of they people" = Romans (page 100). Change
from Grecian to Roman (page 100).
11:15 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:16 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:17 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:18 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:19 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:20 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:21 vile person = Tiberius (page 100).
11:22 prince of the covenant = Christ in 31 CE (page 100).
11:23 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:24 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:25 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:26 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:27 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:28 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:29 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:30 UNCLEAR but in context of Rome (page 100).
11:31 The ministry of Christ in the daily in heaven is usurped by a
false system of worship [papal system's role for over a thousand years] (page
100).
11:32 UNCLEAR but in context of papacy
11:33 UNCLEAR but in context of papacy
11:34 UNCLEAR but in context of papacy
11:35 "Time of the end" 1798 CE (page 105). "Because the
final verses of Daniel 11 seem to be unfulfilled prophecy, we need to be
careful how we interpret them" (page 105).
11:36 Papacy (pages 100, 105). Pfandl linked it to the little horn.
(page 101).
11:37 Papacy (page 105).
11:38 Papacy (page 105).
11:39 Papacy (page 105).
11:40 King of the north = papacy (page 105). King of the south = no
longer literal Egypt (page 105). "Revelation 11:8 uses Egypt to signify
that which is opposed to true religion" (page 105).
11:41 Ammon, Edom and Moab "These nations no longer exist, which
indicates that this passage is not intended to be construed as literal. In
ancient days these nations were the enemies of God's people...." (page
105).
11:42 UNCLEAR
11:43 UNCLEAR
11:44 UNCLEAR
11:45 UNCLEAR
12:1 Time of trouble (page 299).
12:2 Jesus comes
12:3 Resurrection
C. Mervyn Maxwell (1981)
11:1 Darius the Mede (page 283)
11:2 Xerxes 486-465 BCE
11:3 Alexander the Great (page 283).
11:4 Alexander the Great 323 BCE (page 284).
11:5 Jerusalem the center from which wind-directions are calculated
(page 284)
king of south = Egypt = Ptolemy I Soter (323-280 BCE) "one of his
princes" = Seleucus I Nicator (page 284).
11:6 king of the north = (Syria) Antiochus II king of the south =
Ptolemy II (page 285)
11:7 Ptolemy III (page 238) king of the north = Antiochus II (page 286).
11:8 Ptolemy III
11:9 Seleucus II 242 BCE (a new king of the north, page 287).
11:10 Seleucus II sons were Seleucus III and Antiochus III (page 287)
11:11 king of the South = Ptolemy IV (page 287) king of the North =
Antiochus III
11:12
11:13
11:14 "robbers of they people" = Romans (page 291)
"to establish the vision" = Romans
11:15 Romans involved but king of the North is Antiochus III
Maxwell mentioned that 16-39 was normally applied to Antiochus Epiphanes
(page 291).
11:16 Pompey 63 BCE (page 293)
11:17 Julius Ceasar, Cleopatra and Ptolemy daughter of women = Cleopatra
11:18
11:19 Julius Caesar and the fort of the own land = Rome (page 293)
11:20 Caesar Augustus = the raiser of taxes (page 293).
11:21 vile person = Medieval pope (page 293).
11:22 prince of the covenant = Christ in 31 CE (page 291).
11:23 Medieval papacy grew stronger from an early small origin (page
293).
11:24 Crusade July 15 1099 (page 294).
11:25
11:26
11:27 "two kings speaks lies at the same table" = crusaders,
Reginald of Chatillon and Guy de Lusignon with sultan Saladin (page 294).
11:28 Papacy against heretics (page 295).
11:29 Final crusade Louis IX was taken prisoner in Cairo. Not
successful.
11:30 Papacy used same principles of crusades against heretics (page
295). Kittim = West (page 294).
11:31 Papacy obscured tamid during the crusades (page 295). The papal
system's role for over a thousand years.
11:32
11:33 Waldenses, Lollards, Hussites, Lutherans, Anabaptists, Huguenots
11:34
11:35
11:36 Medieval papacy (page 296).
11:37
11:38 Medieval popes hiring armies for political objectives (page 296).
11:39
11:40 "We have said nothing so far about verses 40-45" (page
296). He hardly did. "But as to the precise events on earth that will
accompany their fulfillment, wisdom suggests we may not know them until they
actually take place" page 297.
11:41 UNCLEAR
11:42 UNCLEAR
11:43 UNCLEAR
11:44 UNCLEAR
11:45 "he" = "king of the north" = Roman
Christianity (page 297). "Pitching 'palatial tents' between the
Mediterranean Sea and the Jerusalem temple symbolizes the encroachment of the
king of the north on the prerogatives of Christ's sanctuary ministry"
(page 297).
12:1 Time of trouble (page 299).
12:2 Jesus comes
12:3 Resurrection
Jacques Doukhan (2000)
"The literary form of our text [verses 5-39], particularly its
symmetry, warns us against a literalistic interpretation of the details."
(page 175).
"Our approach remains outside the traditional line of
interpretation" (page 180 endnote 6).
11:1 Darius the Mede (page 167) = Artaxerxes the Persian
11:2 Three kings are: Cambyses (530-522 BCE), Darius (522-486 BCE),
Xerxes 486-465 BCE = the Ahasuerus of Esther (486-465 BCE) (page 167).
Artaxerxes (465-423 BCE) = fourth one (page 167).
11:3 Alexander the Great (page 167).
11:4 Rome "This new power, as we have seen in the earlier
prophecies, is Rome" (page 168). "Clearly, the prophecy has the
kingdom of Rome itself in mind" (page 168).
11:5 RAB = GREAT SOUTH "The events introduced in verse 5 come
chronologically after Rome and do not apply to the Hellenistic kingdoms of the
Ptolemies and the Seleucids, as the traditional line of interpretation
infers" (page 168). "The period covered by the conflict narrated in
Daniel 11:5-45 is therefore the same as that covered by the little horn in Daniel
7 and 8, and by the toes in Daniel 2" (page 168). "It is not easy to
find the historical counterpart to our passage" [verses 5-39] (page 174).
11:6 YESHARIM = ALLIANCES SOUTH king of the north = Little Horn
LO YAAMOD = FAILS SOUTH, BAT = DAUGTHER SOUTH
11:7 WE AMAD...KANNO = STANDING AT HIS PLACE SOUTH king of the north =
Little Horn
11:8 king of the south = Little Horn
11:9 HAYIL = ARMY NORTH king of the north = Little Horn
11:10 YITGARE = STIR HIMSELF UP NORTH, SHTF = FLOOD NORTH Little Horn
11:11 LEB = HEART SOUTH Little Horn
11:12 RIBBOTH = THOUSANDS SOUTH Little Horn
11:13 RAB + GADOL = MUCH AND HUGE NORTH Little Horn
11:14 "robbers of they people" =
"to establish the vision" = Romans
11:15 Romans involved but king of the North is Little Horn
11:16 Little horn establishes himself in Palestine = Beautiful Land
(page 169).
11:17 LO TAAMOD = FAILS NORTH Little Horn, BAT = DAUGHTER NORTH
11:18 WE AMAD AL KANNO = STANDING AT HIS PLACE NORTH Little Horn
11:19 Little Horn
11:20 = the raiser of taxes
11:21 vile person = Medieval pope
11:22 YESHARIM = ALLIANCES NORTH prince of the covenant = Christ in 31
CE
11:23 YESHARIM = ALLIANCES NORTH Little Horn
11:24 Little Horn
11:25 HAYIL = ARMY SOUTH Little Horn
11:26 SHTF = FLOOD SOUTH Little Horn
11:27 "two kings speaks lies at the same table" =
11:28 LEB = HEART NORTH Little horn attacks the holy covenant (page
169).
11:29 Little Horn
11:30 Little horn attacks the holy covenant (page 169).
11:31 Little Horn desecrates the sanctuary and abolishes the daily
sacrifice (page 169).
11:32 Little Horn
11:33 Little Horn
11:34 RABBIM = MANY NORTH Little Horn
11:35 Little Horn
11:36 Little Horn challenges God and seeks to usurp Him. King of north =
Little horn (page 169).
11:37 Little Horn challenges God and seeks to usurp Him. King of north =
Little horn (page 169).
11:38 Little Horn
11:39 Little Horn
11:40 "We must wait for the last phase, concerning the time of the
end (verses 40-45), to really grasp the full significance behind these
conflicts and alliances" (page 175). South will attack the north (page
175).
11:41 Little horn establishes himself in Palestine = Beautiful Land
(page 169). North will attain victory (page 175). Edom, Ammon and Moab =
various atheistic adn political movements (page 176).
11:42 UNCLEAR
11:43 King of the north penetrate southern regions: Egypt, Libya, and
Ethiopia. His enemies march at his side (page 176).
11:44 "Rumors from the northeast, that is Palestine (if we consider
him to be in Ethiopia at that time) force him to return in that direction"
(page 176).
11:45 Little horn establishes himself in Palestine = Beautiful Land
(page 169). Little horn = king of the north and has the same death (page 169).
"The power of the north and the little horn therefore present the same
characteristic features, the same behavior, come from the same direction, and
share the same tragic death." (page 169). They erect their tents between
the seas "that is between the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea, which
frame the land of Israel" (page 176). "Their appearance threatens the
Temple of God" (page 176). "beautiful holy mountain" =
designating the heavenly heights of God's dwelling place (cf. Isaiah 14:13)
(page 176-177). "The Armaggeddon of the book of Revelation, as well as the
mountain in the book of Daniel, should not be understood as a geographical
location, but as an allusion to a spiritual battle of cosmic dimensions"
(page 177). "The battle described by the prophet does not directly concern
the modern state of Israel. The Temple no longer exists" (page 178).
12:1 Time of trouble (page 299).
12:2 Jesus comes
12:3 Resurrection
Van Wyk notes with the eyes of a reviewer:
1. Dr. Doukhan's selection of words for comparison of the powers of
north and south is somewhat arbitrary. The word AMAD = STAND is used many times
throughout the description (see verses 16, 17, 20, 21 etc.). Also the words
THEY SHALL STUMBLE = WENIKSHALU reappear a number of times (see verses 14, 19).
The words should be explained from another angle. Daniel is a geronti and the
repetative vocabulary style is that of a geronti. He is almost using a
recasting technique in his telling of what the angel Gabriel said. Of course,
in all probability he had a scribe to whom he dictated this chapter, since he
might have been too old to write it himself, at least able to be read.
2. Dr. Doukhan in a way represents those scholars who
"gave-up" on historical analysis and historical research and
subsequently they attempt to take a shortcut through allegorizations or
spiritualizing events and entitities mentioned as part of event(s). The problem
is that scooping generalizations runs into trouble with the detail of the
account. For example, how would dr. Doukhan explain the temple of verse 45 in
heaven as God's dwelling place and in the same breath explain what the seat of
his tent is that is to be set up between the Mediteranean and the Dead Sea as
he so fittingly analized? How is the king of the north [in his interpretation
the little horn] going to guard the temple in heaven [his perspective for the
location of the temple]?
3. There is a further logical problem with his generalization of the
king of the north as the little horn: he explicitly indicates in 11:45 that the
little horn and the king of the north or papacy will die or literally as the
text says, come to his end and no one to help him. The question is: if the
little horn or the king of the north or papacy dies in 11:45, who is going to
be the power that persecutes during the subsequent time of Jacob's trouble that
is to follow this event, set off by the closing of the door of mercy?
4. Dr. Doukhan brushes aside the identifications of Uriah Smith, F.
Nichol in the SDA Bible Commentary and Mervyn Maxwell's presentation as
traditional literal interpretations that should not be used, but he substitute
it with a literary or linguistic structuralism which is methodologically in
need of revision. Dr. Doukhan is not the first to do this in SDA circles as the
commentaries are indicating. It is possible that prof. dr. Doukhan realized
correctly the artificial shift in SDA exegesis of the shift halfway through the
chapter from historical-particular to allegorical-general [compare below the
explanations of George McGready Price on this very aspect in 1955]. He may have
tried to renovate the dilemma by superimposing structuralism? Structuralism is
not unknown to this researcher (current writer). He has done structural
analysis of a linguistic kind on the following texts in the 1980's: Maleachi
4:22-24; Psalm 1; 2; 7; 8; 9; 15; 16; 19; 23; 24; 25; 29; 30; 31; 32; 33; 37; 46
with its staircase parallelism, synonymous paralellism, chiastic structures,
many cases of attempts to reproduce nature sounds etc; 50 (idem); 51; 69; 73;
74; 76; 85; 87; 90; 91; 96; 98; 103; 104; 105; 106; 110; 114; 116; 119; 133;
135; 137; Job 32:7-9; Proverbs 2; 10; 22; 23; 26:17-28 (see especially in this
chapter how the body parts are arranged structurally in this poem); Songs of
Solomon 3. See for example Ecclessiastes 3:2-8 as was structurally analized by
prof. dr. Jimmy Loader of the University of South Africa in ZAW 1969 and
considered a sonnet in the Old Testament. Loader has his own problems but it
may serve well to take heed of his words: ZAW 1969: 12 "It is
methodologically incorrect to transplant data from one unit into another
without the discipline of structural analysis"; 11; 12; Daniel 1:2 LORD
GAVE IN HAND with 1:9 GOD GAVE DANIEL with 1:17 GOD GAVE THEM; 9 especially
since much of it is poetry; Isaiah 14:11-15; 40; 42; 45; 49; 50; 56 (see here
especially verse 1 compare to verse 4; verse 3 with the repetition of the word
SHOMER and in verse 4 with the repetition of the word WE-AL, verses 5-6
connected with the word SHEM and verse 8 the same as in verse 1 and 4 NE-UM
ADONAI YAHWEH; see 58:15; 60; Jeremiah 15:5 synonymous paralellism; Ezechiel
21:8-10 (chiasm A:B:B:A:C:C:A); 21:27 (chiasm); 32:7-8 (chiasm A:B:A:C:C:B);
36;26 (L. Boadt said in VT 25 ( ): 698 "The structuralization of this
bicolon with the chiasm distinctly accents this point" A:B:C:D:C:D:A:B;
Hosea 5:1-5; Joel 1:10-12; Jonah 2:5-10; Nahum 1:7-8 (Janus paralellism, see G.
Rendsburg, JBL 99 (1980): 291-293; 2:12-13 (chiasm); book of Haggai; Sacharia
8; Deuteronomy 32:1-2 A:B:B:A; Leviticus 17:10-11; repetative style in legal
books Leviticus 11:44-45; INSCRIPTIONS: Sefire (structural analysis of Sefire I
C 18-25);
In considering prof. dr. Doukhan's methodology, it is well for us to
read with care the chapter written by dr. Gerhard Hasel on the dangers of
structuralism "structuralism is part of a movement in this century that
considers the Bible as literature. Another part of the same movement is known
as "new criticism". It too has been primarily concerned with the text
as it meets the eye, which is to say, as it presents itself to the
reader." Structuralism and new Criticism separates the text from its
historical moorings". Although prof. dr. Doukhan has dealt with issues
structurally and historically, this reader felt that his commentary displayed a
researcher who has given up on historical data and who is contempt to pass on
or pass by with mere superficial generalizations. A scholar who was criticized
by this researcher in the past (1986) is Willem Prinsloo in "Isaiah 5:1-7:
A synchronic approach" in Studies in Isaiah, OTWSA 23 (19800: 183-197.
Structuralism and the Kilamuwa inscription; see also the chiastic arrangement
in Deir Alla inscription Combination II lines 12 and 14. In fact, in this
inscription many word correlations were pointed out by this researcher in
unpublished research in 1983. The intentional planning by the scribe of
arranging the words in the Legend of the Worm (published originally in 1903 by
R. C. Thompson) was highlighted in a unpublished structural analysis by this
researcher in 1986. The text is written in Neo-Babylonian cuneiform and it
seems to support the idea that it was common to place repetative elements in an
arranged form during the description of an event; structural analysis of the
Barrakib inscription (unpublished); Chiastic structures in the Annals of
Sennacherib describing the event with Hezekiah, unpublished research 1986. In
this research it was found that Taylor Prism Column II line 76 with the name of
Hezekiah is in the center of a chiasm and that 75 and 77 correlate, 79 and 73,
80 and 71, 82 and 69, III line 2 and II line 66. Any ANE scholar will know that
structuralism is just as part of the past as it is with our advertisement
designers in modern times. Poster makers can teach us a lot about the assumed
audience and their eyes or view that is kept constantly in mind by the poster
designer. Structuralism in ANE texts and the Bible serves a very important
function in making it easier for the brain to quickly memorize the data
presented in the structure. It is not the purpose of the correlations of words
in a structural form in the text to remove the data of the text from its
location and allocate it to other areas. Neither is it the purpose of the text
to break the chronological order or the historical importance of the data and
events they represent. The text FUNCTIONS for more than one purpose and FORM is
sometimes adapted to serve that function intended but unless so indicated it
should not necessarily mean that the original function, namely to relate a
description of historical chronological data was intended to be stripped of its
historical moorings. Dr. Doukhan is invited to once more go back to the drawing
board and investigate with motivation history as it relates to chapter 11.
South Korean Union Conference Publication (2004.10.29)
11:1 Darius (page 122)
11:2 Xerxes (page 122) wife of husband of Esther (page 122)
11:3 Alexander the Great (page 123)
11:4 Alexander the Great (page 123)
11:5 Seleucus I (312-281 BCE) and Ptolemy 1 (305-282 BCE) (page 124)
11:6 Antiochus II (261-246 BCE) and Ptolemy II (285-246 BCE) (page 124)
11:7 Seleucus II (246-225 BCE) and Ptolemy III (246-221 BCE) (page 124)
11:8 Seleucus II (246-225 BCE) and Ptolemy III (246-221 BCE) (page 124)
11:9 Seleucus II (246-225 BCE) and Ptolemy III (246-221 BCE) (page 124)
11:10 Seleucus III (225-223 BCE) Antiochus III (223-187 BCE) and Ptolemy
IV (221-203 BCE) (page 124)
11:11 Antiochus III (223-187 BCE) and Ptolemy IV (221-203 BCE) (page
124)
11:12 Antiochus III (223-187 BCE) and Ptolemy IV (221-203 BCE) (page
124)
11:13 Antiochus III (223-187 BCE) and Ptolemy IV (221-203 BCE) (page
124)
11:14 Antiochus III (223-187 BCE) and Ptolemy V (203-181 BCE) (page 124)
11:15 Antiochus IV (175-164 BCE) and Ptolemy V (203-181 BCE) (page 124)
11:16 Pompey (63 BCE) (page 129)
11:17 Cleopatra (51-30 BCE) (pages 124 and 129) Julius Caesar (page 129)
11:18 Julius Caesar (page 130)
11:19 Julius Caesar (page 130)
11:20 Augustus Caesar raiser of taxes (page 130)
11:21 Tiberius Caesar (page 131)
11:22 Tiberius Caesar Prince of the covenant = Christ (page 131)
11:23 rise of the papacy after the fourth beast of Daniel (page 134)
11:24 Rome fell (476 CE) papacy continues its role of persecution (page
135)
11:25 Crusaders (1096-1099 CE) (page 135)
11:26 Saladin, Reginald and Guy de Lisignon (page 136)
11:27 Crusades (page 136)
11:28 unsuccessful crusades (page 136)
11:29 unsuccessful crusades (page 136)
11:30 unsuccessful crusades (page 136)
11:31 538-1798 CE papacy (page 138) attacking the heavenly sanctuary
(page 137)
11:32 papacy (page 137) attacking the heavenly sanctuary (page 137)
11:33 Medieval persecution (page 138)
11:34 papacy (page 138)
11:35 papacy (page 139)
11:36 papacy (page 139)
11:37 papacy (page 140)
11:38 papacy (page 140)
11:39 papacy (implied)
11:40 Berthier in 1798 CE with wounding of the papacy (page 141) papacy
attack communism (page 143-145) 1982 until December 1991 (page 145)
11:41 whole world following papacy (page 145)
11:42 papacy reaching all countries over the world (page 145)
11:43 papacy reaching all countries over the world (page 145) economic
control of papacy over the world (page 146-147)
11:44 preaching of the everlasting gospel (page 147-148)
11:45 collapse of the papacy (page 148)
12:1 Time of trouble Jesus comes
12:2 resurrection
MOST PIVOTAL COMMENTARY ON DANIEL 11 IN SDA CIRCLES
George McCready Price (1955)
11:1 Darius the Mede (Traditionally thought to be Gubaru or Gobryas;
some others Cyaxares II the uncle and father-in-law of Cyrus; now [1955]
consensus there never was a Median kingdom following Babylonian. "This
imaginary Median kingdom was simply an invention of the "critics" to
enable them to have four world empires before Rome" (page 275).
11:2 Cyrus (539-530 BCE) (first) first of four is Cambyses (530-522
BCE), Smerdis (522 BCE), Darius the Great (522-486 BCE) and Xerxes I (486-465
BCE) (page 276).
11:3 Alexander the Great (page 277).
11:4 Alexander the Great (page 277).
11:5 "This text seems ambigious, even equivocal; hence commentators
have, perhaps rightly, appealed to the facts of history to determine the
meaning of the text" (page 277). Cassander, Lysimachus, Seleucus, Ptolemy
(page 278).
11:6 king of the north = Antiochus Theos received Bernice as wife who is
daugther of Ptolemy Philadelphus (Soter) (page 278).
11:7 Ptolemy Euergetes (page 280).
11:8
11:9 Seleucus Callinicus (242 BCE) (pages 280-281).
11:10 "We are still on groun where all commentators are
agreed" (page 281). Antiochus Magnus (III) or the Great who was the father
of Antiochus Epiphanes. (218 BCE) declared war against Egypt.
11:11 Campaign of 217 BCE (page 282).
11:12
11:13 Antiochus and Philip V of Macedon and influential parties among
the Jews (page 283).
11:14 "For the first time in this chapter we meet with a statement
regarding which commentators are not agreed" (page 283). "children of
the violent among thy people" is applied by some to "unprincipled
Jews who became known as 'the sons of Tobias'" Others applied it to the
power of the Romans (page 284). "After taking all things into
consideration, it seems better to apply this expression to some faction among
the Jewish people...." (page 284). (e.g. Zealots [6-70 CE]).
11:15 Antiochus and Philip V of Macedon (page 285).
11:16 "It should be evident that a new power is here brought to
view" (page 286). Battle of Pydna, June 22 168 BCE the Romans under
Aemilius Paulus crushed Macedonia (page 286).
11:17 "The meaning of the original text is not clear; so the
various translators have tried their hands at 'correcting' it in accord with
what they think it means, that is, so as to make it more in accord with the
history to which they think it applies" (page 287) He cites Wright
"The correction of the text in order to bring it into harmony with history
is, however, a doubtful expedient, and has in this chapter too often to be
resorted to" (page 287). View I apply it to Antiochus III (Magna) and his
daughter Cleopatra (page 287) View II apply it to the Romans "On the basis
of applying this passage to the Romans, it is not clear to what this phrase and
the remaining part of the verse may refer" (page 287). Julius Caesar and
Pompey. "It is doubtful if Caesar's intrigue with Cleopatra is what is
referred to in the middle part of the verse..." (page 288).
11:18 Uriah Smith applied the first clause to Caesar's campaign against
the son of Mithridates in Asia Minor in 47 BCE with his report: veni, vidi,
vici "I came, I saw, I conquered" "but there is not any
satisfactory application of the latter part of the verse" (page 288).
11:19 Julius Caesar (pages 288-289). Price explicitly follows Uriah
Smith here.
11:20 Augustus Octavius (31 BCE) (pages 289-290).
11:21 a contemptible person = Tiberius (page 291).
11:22 prince of the covenant = Christ who started his work as Anointed
One at his baptism in 27 CE (page 293). Between 27-Spring of 31 CE.
11:23 "We have here apparently another break in the continuity of
the vision. The power here spoken of must be the same as that with which we
were previously dealing; but whereas individuals were spoken of who were
leaders or heads of the Roman government, we now appear to go back a certain
distance in the history and deal with the Roman empire in its more general
aspects..." (page 293). "Now, having told the story of Rome down to
the most important event of all the ages, the tragic death of the Prince of the
Covenant, the angel takes us back to a famous event in the history of the
Jewish people for a new start in the narration of the history of the world.
This famous event is the league made with the Jews in the year 161 BCE"
(page 294).
11:24 pax-Romana from 31 BCE plus 360 years until 330 CE. "Dr.
Edwin R. Thiele, of Emmanuel Missionary College, Berrien Springs, Michigan,
thinks that the the Crusades are the events referred to in this and several
following verses. He would seem to be correct in his claim a priori we might
rightly expect these strange upheavals and dislocations of great masses of
humanity to be mentioned somewhere. He does make out a good case in verses 28
and 30 for the notorius crusades against the Albigenses and Waldenses, as the
armies of Rome shifted from crusades against the infidel to crusades against
the 'heretics'. However, the verses following thereafter would undoubtedly
apply to the Roman persecution anyway, even if Dr. Thiele's interpretation of
the passage from verses 25 to 30 were not followed" (page 296). "On
the whole, I do not feel at all certain about the meaning of several verses
here around the middle of this chapter. But Uriah Smith's notes seems about as
likely to be right as any; hence we shall follow his lead regarding these
verses" (page 296).
11:25 Rome at the battle of Actium September 2 of 31 BCE (page 296).
11:26 Antony was destroyed (page 297).
11:27 Antony and Augustus (page 298) since they were brothers-in-law.
11:28 "Obviously the power here mentioned cannot be the king of the
south, but must refer to Rome, the victor in the previous conflict. We shall
avoid some mental confusion if we think of the "king" here or
hereafter mentioned, not as an individual, but as the idealized personifcation
of the nation or power which he represents" (page 298). Octavius against
Antony and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE (page 299).
11:29 Move of capital to Constantinople after 330 CE (see verse 24)
"if we bear in mind that henceforth we are dealing with national affairs,
not with individuals, we shall be prepared to understand and allow for a
considerable lapse of time between some of the events here considered"
(page 299). Critics not clear e.g. S. R. Driver "we are however
imperfectly informed as to the events of Seleucus IV's reign," The book of
Daniel page 176. "They all admit that there is no record whatever of a
third expedition against Egypt, which their interpretation of the last of this
chapter demands" (page 300). Edward Heppenstall felt it made reference to
the persecutions of Diocletian and that the transition to the tolerance of Christianity.
The two kings at the same table was the church and state in his view.
"This may be what is meant in some of these verses; but the details are
not at all clear. Therefore I am here following along with Uriah Smith to verse
31" (page 300). "Like other transition texts, which come in between
two groups of texts which can be readily understood without any question, the
twenty-ninth verse is a difficult one".(page 300).
11:30 The end of the western empire (476 CE) "this transition from
imperial to papal Rome is without doubt what is referred to in the closing
clause of this verse" (page 301).
11:31 508 CE setting up of the sacrifice of the mass theology of the
Roman Catholic church (page 302). "At any rate, Christ applied it to
something connected with imperial or pagan Rome, while we are here applying it
to papal Rome. It will be admitted by everyone that it would be only by the
figure of metonymy, where some significant part or feature is used for the
larger or more important word, that what Christ spoke of can be understood for
the Roman government itself" (page 303).
11:32 Waldenses, Albigenses and later Huguenots, Anabaptists (page 304).
11:33 1260 years between 538-1798 BCE (pages 304-305).
11:34 "help" Revelation 12:13-16 Luther and other Reformers
(page 306).
11:35 1798 = time of the end (contra R. H. Charles) (page 306).
"four verses of description here intervene before the narrative of events
is resumed in verse 40. These four verses of description and characterization
have been thought by some to refer to the atheistic regime of the French
Revolution.... However, it is contrary to all legitimate rules of
interpretation to say that a new power is brought in here without any
notification that is wholly new. Besides, this atheistic power of the French
Revolution maintained its character of atheism for only a brief period. It is
incredible that the prophecy should turn aside from the consideration of the
career of the papal power, which was by no means ended at the time here spoken
of, and take up the career of France, which was and is by no means the most
outstanding power of the world, or most important in its connection with the
people of God for the last days" (pages 306-307). Four verses are
"similar or identical to other well-known prophecies of the papal power in
the seventh and eighth chapters of this book, and in Paul's description in 2
Thessalonian 2:3-12 that it is unreasonable to abandon all the parallels and
identities to bring in another power which is not elsewhere mentioned in any of
the prophecies of this book of Daniel, and only once in the book of
Revelation" (page 307).
11:36 "essential character of the Roman power" (page 307).
"it cannot refer to infidel France during the time of the French
Revolution, as some commentators have supposed. Obviously it must apply to some
anti-Christian power which continues its blasphemous work to the end of time.
Rome answers these conditions, and nothing else does" (page 308).
11:37 Roman Catholic church (page 308).
11:38 god of fortresses = "Roman Catholic church has from its
earliest days regarded with worshipful reverence as the 'mahuzzim' or patron
protectors or the places where they were buried or were deposited" (page
309). "god whom his fathers knew not" = "waver-god which the
Catholic Church calls the host, a word from the Latin which originally meant a
victim or a sacrifice" (page 310).
11:39 "ceremonial of the mass" = "foreign god" (page
310). wafer god of the eucharist. Simony = traffic in sacred offices (page
311).
11:40 Two papacy views: Interpretation 1 and Interpretation 2. 1.
triangular view "for it turns largely on the view that the papacy is here
treated as a third power which is being attacked from the two opposite sides,
the south and the north. On this view all the pronouns in the third person
which are here and hereafter used,"he" and "him" are
uniformly applied to the papacy, though the terms "south" and
"north" are not applied as strictly along geographical lines as was
done by Uriah Smith, who applied the third power to France instead of to the
papacy. This modern revised triangular view also tends to emphasize the time
since 1844 as pre-eminently "the time of the end" and applies this
verse and all those following it to either the present or the future. Those who
hold this view also think that verse 45, at the last of this chapter, may mean
that at some future time the papacy may set up temporary headquarters in the
city of Jerusalem. This would be to say that we have in these verses, 40-45, a
blending of literal (geographical) with the figurative or symbolic. Such a
partial blending of literal with symbolic is not wholly unknown in prophecy, as
has been pointed out elsewhere. In dealing with unfulfilled prophecy it
behooves us all to be modest, for we may be mistaken. Hence without giving
arguments for or against this interpretation, we simply pass to a second
view." 2. "The second system of interpretation is different only in a
few minor details. Both views agree in saying that the main world power here
dealt with is the Roman papacy, and both say that the final verses of this
chapter mean the same power. But, the second interpretation says that the name
of the "king of the north", though not repeated throughout many
preceding verses, should be applied to the power spoken of from about verse 16
onward. In other words, this interpretation says that the papacy is "the
king of the north" as described in the preceding verses. This view
eliminates any third power in verse 40, for it interprets it in the following
manner as simplified by this paraphrase:'At the time of the end shall the king
of the south contend with him [the king of the north, or the papacy]; and the
king of the north shall come against him [the king of the south] like a
whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships, and he [the
king of the north] shall enter into the countries and shall overflow and pass
through [he shall come off triumphantly victorious]" "This
interpretation brings this eleventh chapter of Daniel into full parallelism with
the lines of world history traced in chapter 2, in chapter 7, and again in
chapter 8, all of which tell of the desolating power of Rome exercised on a
world-wide scale. This was a line of argument which appealed so strongly to
James White, who time and again declared all four of Daniel's lines of prophecy
covered the same ground, and all end the same way" (page 313). "From
about the middle of the eleventh chapter onward, the prophecy becomes less
local and nationalistic, and more and more distinctly religious and of global
significance...Since all this cannot be denied, we have a right to expect that
from this fortieth verse and onward we shall be dealing with more abstract and
more religious, or spiritual, ideas. These will also be more world-wide, though
spoken of under the old familiar terms used by the Jews of twenty-five
centuries agao, which must now be treated as symbols" (page 314).
11:41 "One of the chief problems from here to the end of the
chapter is to decide how much of the language is symbolic or figurative, and
how much is to be understood literally" (page 315). "Some
believe...glorious land...referring to Palestine...Others think...probably
means the Protestant world as a whole...It is extremely difficult to see how
the other localities mentioned, 'Edom,' and 'Moab' and 'Ammon' can possibly be
taken literally...To me it seems more reasonable to interpret these names
symbolically, in harmony with the rest of the prophecy" (page 315).
11:42 "It is at least curious to find the land of Egypt here
differentiated from the king of the south" (page 315). "The apology
of some of the 'critics' that it means the country in distinction from the king
is not convincing". Egypt = organized atheism or open anti-Christianity
"as in the French Revolution and its modern counterpart, international
communism" (page 316).
11:43
11:44
11:45 "The whole passage is a military one and fits appropriately
into the rest of the prophecy" (page 317).
12:1
12:2
12:3
Non-SDA
Commentaries summarized
Jerome Commentary on Daniel (396 CE)
11:1 Darius [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "And
from the first year of Darius the Mede, I stood up that he might be
strengthened and confirmed." Daniel implies, "From the first year of
the reign of Darius, who overthrew the Chaldeans and delivered me from the hand
of my enemies to the extent of his ability (for even his sealing of the pit of
lions with his signet ring was for my protection, lest my adversaries should
slay me), I for my part stood before God, and I besought God's mercy upon him,
in view of the man's love for me, in order that either he or his kingdom might
be strengthened and confirmed. And since I persevered in my prayer, I was
answered by God and given to understand the following information."
11:2 Xerxes 486-465 BCE [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)]
"He states that four kings shall arise in Persia after Cyrus, namely
Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, and the Magus named Smerdis, who married Pantaptes,
the daughter of Cambyses. Then, when he was slain by seven Magi and Darius had
succeeeded to his throne, the same Pantaptes married Darius, and by him gave
birth to Xerxes, who became a most powerful and wealthy king, and led an
innumerable host against Greece and performed those deeds which are related by
the Greek historians. For in the archonship of Callias he destroyed Athens by
fire, and about that same time waged the war at Thermopylae and the naval
battle at Salamis. It was in his time that Sophocles and Euripides became
famous [hardly Euripides, whose first play was given in 455, nine years after
Xerxes' death], and Themistocles fled in exile to Persia, where he died as a
result of drinking the blood of a bull. And so that writer [Tertullian?] is in
error who records as the fourth king that Darius who was defeated by Alexander,
for he was not the fourth king, but the fourteenth king of the Persians after
Cyrus. It was in the seventh year of his rule that Alexander defeated and slew
him. Moreover it should be observed that after he has specified four kings of Persia
after Cyrus, the author [i.e., Daniel] omits the nine others and passes right
on to Alexander. For the Spirit of prophecy was not concerned about preserving
historical detail but in summarizing only the most important matters."
11:3 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] Alexander the
Great "He clearly refers to Alexander the Great, king of the Macedonians,
and son of Philip."
11:4 Alexander the Great 323 BCE
11:5 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "And the king
of the South shall be strengthened." The reference is to Ptolemy, son of
Lagos, who was the first to become king in Egypt, and was a very clever, mighty
and wealthy man, and possessed such power that he was able to restore Pyrrhus,
King of Epirus, to his kingdom after he had been driven out, and also to seize
Cyprus and Phoenicia." "one of his princes" = "And one of his princes shall prevail over him,
and he shall rule with great power, for his dominion shall be great." The
person mentioned is Ptolemy Philadelphus, the second king of Egypt and the son
of the former Ptolemy." [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)]
"And it is not the purpose of Holy Scripture to cover external history
apart from the Jews, but only that which is linked up with the nation of Israel."
11:6 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "As we have
already said, it was Seleucus, surnamed Nicanor, who first ruled over Syria.
The second king was Antiochus, who was called Soter. The third was Antiochus
himself, (705) who was called Theos, that is the Divine. He was the one who
waged numerous wars with Ptolemy Philadelphus, who was the second ruler in
Egypt, and he also fought with all the Babylonians and the men of the East, And
so after |122 many years Ptolemy Philadelphus wished to have done with this
vexatious struggle, and so he gave his daughter, named Berenice, in marriage to
Antiochus, who had already had by a previous wife, named Laodice, two sons,
namely Seleucus, surnamed Callinicus, and the other, Antiochus."
11:7 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "After the
murder of Berenice and the death of her father, Ptolemy Philadelphus, in Egypt,
her brother, who was also named Ptolemy 123 and surnamed Euergetes, succeeded
to the throne as the third of his dynasty, being in fact an offshoot of the
same plant and a bud of the same root as she was, inasmuch as he was her (p.
561) brother. He came up with a great army and advanced into the province (706)
of the king of the North, that is Seleucus Callinicus, who together with his
mother Laodice was ruling in Syria, and abused them, and not only did he seize
Syria but also took Cilicia and the remoter regions beyond the Euphrates and
nearly all of Asia as well."
11:8 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] Ptolemy Philadelphus
= king of the South
11:9 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] Seleucus
Callinicus = king of the North
11:10 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "After the
flight and death of Seleucus Callinicus, his two sons, the Seleucus surnamed
Ceraunus and the Antiochus who was called the Great, were provoked by a hope of
victory and of avenging their father, and so they assembled an army against
Ptolemy Philopator and took up arms."
11:11 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] king of the South
= "The Ptolemy surnamed Philopator, having lost Syria through the betrayal
of Theodotius, gathered together a very great multitude and launched an
invasion against Antiochus the Great, who now bears the title of king of the
North."
11:12
11:13 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "And since
Ptolemy Philopator was now dead, Antiochus broke his treaty and set his army in
motion against Philopator's four-year-old son, who was called Epiphanes. For so
great was the dissoluteness and arrogancy of Agathoclea, that those provinces
which had previously been subjected to Egypt rose up in rebellion."
"Ptolemy Epiphanes, who was then a mere child."
11:14 "robbers of they people" "the high priest, Onias,
fled to Egypt, taking a large number of Jews along with him, and was given by
Ptolemy an honorable reception. He then received the region known as
Heliopolis, and by a grant of the king, he erected a temple in Egypt like the
temple of the Jews, and it remained standing up until the reign of Vespasian,
over a period of two hundred and fifty years." "to establish the
vision" = The prophecy of Isaiah "There shall be an altar of the Lord
in Egypt, and the name of the Lord shall be found in their territories"
(Isa. 19:19).
11:15 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "Purposing
to retake Judaea and the many cities of Syria, Antiochus [Epiphanes] joined
battle with Scopas, Ptolemy's general, near the sources of the Jordan near
where the city now called Paneas was founded, and he put him to flight and
besieged him in Sidon together with ten thousand of his soldiers. In order to
free him, Ptolemy dispatched the famous generals, Eropus, Menocles and
Damoxenus (Vulgate: Damoxeus). Yet he was unable to lift the siege...."
11:16 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "And as for
the statement, 'And he shall stand in the glorious land, and it shall be
consumed (or, finished) by his [Antiochus Epiphanes] hand,' the term 'glorious
land,' or, as the Septuagint interprets it, 'the land of desire' (that is, in
which God takes pleasure) signifies Judaea, and particularly Jerusalem."
"Glorious land" = Aquila 130 CE, Symmachus 170 CE = "land of
bravery" Theodotion 190 CE = "Sabin".
11:17 "Daugther of women" [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view
(see verse 24)] "[Antiochus Epiphanes gave] Cleopatra, to young Ptolemy in
the seventh year of his reign; and in his thirteenth year she was given to him
in marriage."
11:18
11:19 [Jerome's view = Porphyry's view (see verse 24)] "And so this
is what the Scripture refers to in this passage, when it states that he
[Antiochus Epiphanes] would capture many islands, and yet because of the Roman
conqueror [Romans: Lucius Scipio Nasica and also his brother, Publius Scipio
Africanus, who had vanquished Hannibal] he would lose the kingdom of Asia; and that the disgrace he [Antiochus
Epiphanes] had inflicted would come back upon his own head; and that in the end
he would flee from Asia Minor and return to the empire of his own land, and
would then stumble and fall, so that his [Antiochus Epiphanes] place would not
be found."
11:20 [Jerome's view] "The reference is to the Seleucus surnamed
Philopator, the son of Antiochus the Great, who during his reign performed no
deeds worthy of Syria or of his father, but perished ingloriously without
fighting a single battle." [Porphyry's view] "Porphyry, however,
claims that it was not this Seleucus who is referred to, but rather Ptolemy
Epiphanes...." [Jerome's criticism of Porphyry] "Yet how could
Ptolemy be said to rise up in the place of Antiochus the Great, since he did
nothing of the sort?" [Jewish view] "The Hebrews claim that it is
Trypho who was intended by the man who was most vile...."
11:21
11:22
11:23
11:24 [Jerome's dissent from Porphyry] "Up to this point the
historical order has been followed, and there has been no point of controversy
between Porphyry and those of our side" [Porphyry on 11:24-45] "But
the rest of the text from here on to the end of the book he interprets as
applying to the person of the Antiochus who was surnamed Epiphanes, the brother
of Seleucus and the son of Antiochus the Great. He reigned in Syria for eleven
years after Seleucus, and he seized Judaea, and it is under his reign that the
persecution of God's Law is related, and also the wars of the Maccabees."
[Jerome on 11;24-45] "But those of our persuasion believe all these things
are spoken prophetically of the Antichrist who is to arise in the end
time." [Porphyry readers criticism of Jerome] "But this factor
appears to them as a difficulty for our view, namely the question as to why the
prophetic discourse should abruptly cease mention of these great kings and
shift from Seleucus to the end of the world." [Porphyry's view] "Now
the Ptolemy meant here was not Epiphanes, who was the fifth Ptolemy to reign in
Egypt, but Ptolemy Philometor, the son of Antiochus' sister, Cleopatra; and so
Antiochus was his maternal uncle....This is the line of interpretation which
Porphyry followed, pursuing the lead of Sutorius with much redundancy,
discoursing of matters which we have summarized within a brief compass."
[Jerome's view] "But the scholars of our viewpoint have made a better and
correcter interpretation, stating that the deeds are to be performed by the
Antichrist [post-396 CE] at the end of the world. It is he who is destined to
arise from a small nation, that is from the Jewish people, and shall be so
lowly and despised that kingly honor will not be granted him. But by means of
intrigue and deception he shall secure the government and by him shall the arms
of the fighting nation of Rome be overcome and broken. He is to effect this
result by pretending to be the prince of the covenant, that is, of the Law and
Testament of God. And he shall enter into the richest of cities and shall do
what his fathers never did, nor his fathers' fathers. For none of the Jews
except the Antichrist has ever ruled over the whole world. And he shall form a
design against the firmest resolves of the saints and shall do everything [he
wishes] for a time, for as long as God's will shall have permitted him to do
these things."
11:25 [Porphyry] "interprets this as applying to Antiochus"
[Jerome] "But those of our view with greater plausibility interpret all
this as applying to the Antichrist for he is to be born of Jewish people and
come from Babylon and is first of all going to vanquish the king of
Egypt...."
11:26
11:27 "two kings speaks lies at the same table" = Antiochus IV
and Ptolemy did eat at the same table Jerome admitted but Jerome also said
"it cannot be proved from this set of facts that the statement of this
Scripture was ever fulfilled in past history". "Actually, Ptolemy was
a mere child of tender years and was taken in by Antiochus' fraud; how then
could he have plotted evil against him?" Jerome insist the meaning to be
"to the Antichrist and to the king of Egypt whom he has for the first time
overcome." Note that in Jerome's view the Antichrist is future to 396 CE
as he states implicitly in his statement.
11:28
11:29
11:30 Maccabees times [contra-Jerome's view] (IMacc. 1) "after the
Romans expelled him [Antiochus] from Egypt, he came in anger against the
covenant of the sanctuary and was welcomed by those who had forsaken the law of
God and taken part in the religious rites of the Gentiles. But [Jerome's view] this
is to be more amply fulfilled under the Antichrist [future for Jerome] for he
shall become angered at the covenant of God and devise plans against those whom
he wishes to forsake the law of God." Jerome translated Aquila's (130 CE)
translation in Greek of this verse as: "and he shall devise plans to have
the compact of the sanctuary abandoned".
11:31 "But those of the other viewpoint [contra-Jerome] claim that
the persons mentioned are those who were sent by Antiochus two years after he
plundered the Temple in order to exact tribute from the Jews ...setting up an
image of Jupiter Olympius in the Temple at Jerusalem and also statues of
Antiochus himself." "But we on our side [Jerome] contend that all
these things took place in a preliminary way as a mere type of the Antichrist,
who is destined to seat himself in the Temple of God, and make himself out to
be as God." "The Jews, [Jewish view] however, would have us
understand these things as referring, not to Antiochus Epiphanes or the
Antichrist, but to the Romans".
11:32 [non-Jerome view] "Maccabees we read that there
were some who, to be sure, pretended that they were custodians of |135 God's
law..." [Jerome's view] "But
in my opinion this will take place in the time of the Antichrist...."
[thus, post 396 CE].
11:33 [non-Jerome view] = "The books of Maccabees relate the great
sufferings the Jews endured at the hands of Antiochus....[167 BCE]"
[Jerome view] = "But let no one doubt that these things are going to
happen [post-396 CE] under the Antichrist, when many shall resist his authority
and flee away in various directions." [Jewish view] = "The Jews, of
course, interpret these things as taking place at the destruction of the
Temple, which took place under Vespasian and Titus...." [70-73 CE].
11:34 [Porphyry] "Porphyry thinks that the "little help"
was Mattathias of the village of (variant: mountain of) Modin, for he rebelled
against the generals of Antiochus and attempted to preserve the worship of the
true God (I Macc. 2)." [Jerome's view] "Our writers, however, would
have it understood that the small help shall arise under the reign of the
Antichrist, for the saints shall gather together to resist him, and afterwards
a great number of the learned shall fall ... until the time before determined
arrives --- for the true victory shall be won at the coming of Christ."
[Jewish view A] = "Some of the Jews understand these things as applying to
the princes Severus and Antoninus, who esteemed the Jews very highly."
[Jewish view B] "But others understand the Emperor Julian...."
11:35 [Jerome's view] "For the time of their true salvation and
help will be the coming of the Christ...." [Jewish view] "for the
Jews mistakenly imagine that he (i.e., their Messiah) is yet to come, for they
are going to receive the Antichrist (when he comes) (I Cor. 11)."
11:36 [Jewish view] "The Jews believe that this passage has
reference to the Antichrist, alleging that after the small help of Julian a
king is going to rise up who shall do according to his own will and shall lift
himself up against all that is called god, and shall speak arrogant words
against the God of gods. He shall act in such a way as to sit in the Temple of
God and shall make himself out to be God, and his will shall be prospered until
the wrath of God is fulfilled, for in him the consummation will take
place." [Jerome's view] "We too understand this to refer to the
Antichrist." [Porphyry's view] "But Porphyry and the others who
follow his lead suppose the reference to be to Antiochus Epiphanes...."
11:37 [Jerome's view] "There are two interpretations current
concerning these words, that he cherished lust for women, and that he cherished
no lust for them." [Interpretation A] "If we read it one way and
understand it as an apo koinou [the use of a common word in two different clauses]:
"And he shall have no knowledge concerning a lust for women," then it
is more easily applied to the Antichrist; i.e., that he will assume a pretense
of chastity in order to deceive many." [Interpretation B] "But if we
read it in this fashion: "And occupied with lust for women,"
understanding, "...he shall be," then it is more appropriate to the
character of Antiochus." [Porphyry on Maozim] "god Maozim, Porphyry
has offered an absurd explanation, asserting that Antiochus's generals set up a
statue of Jupiter...." [Jerome's view of worship a god whom his father did
not knew] "he shall he shall worship a god whom his fathers did not
know" is more appropriate to the Antichrist [future post-396 CE] than to
Antiochus [past 167 BCE]." [Porphyry on fortress] "Porphyry explained
this as meaning that the man is going to fortify the citadel in Jerusalem and
will station garrisons in the rest of the cities, and will instruct the Jews to
worship a strange god, which doubtless means Jupiter." [Jerome on
fortress] "The Antichrist likewise is going to [post-396 CE] make lavish
bestowal of many rewards...."
11:38 Medieval popes hiring armies for political objectives (page 296).
11:39
11:40 [Porphyry's view] "This too is referred by Porphyry to
Antiochus, on the ground that in the eleventh year of his reign he warred for a
second time against his nephew, Ptolemy Philometor. For when the latter heard
that Antiochus had come, he gathered many thousands of soldiery."
[Jerome's view] "But those of our viewpoint refer these details also to
the Antichrist [future post-396 CE] asserting that he shall first fight against
the king of the South, or Egypt, and shall afterwards conquer Libya and
Ethiopia, for these constitute the three broken horns about which we read
previously. And then he shall come to the land of Israel, and many cities or
provinces shall be given into his hands."
11:41 [non-Jerome view] "They say that in his haste to fight
Ptolemy, the king of the South, Antiochus left untouched the Idumaeans,
Moabites, and Ammonites...." [Jerome's view] "The Antichrist [future
post-396 CE] also is going to leave Idumaea, Moab, and the children of Ammon
(i.e., Arabia) untouched, for the saints are to flee there to the
deserts."
11:42 [Jerome's view] "We read that Antiochus [167 BCE] partially
accomplished this."
11:43 [Jerome's real view] ""He shall pass through the Libyans
and Ethiopians," our school insists that this is more appropriate to the
Antichrist [future post-396 CE]. For Antiochus [167 BCE] never held Libya,
which most writers understand to be North Africa, nor Ethiopia; unless, of
course, his capture of Egypt involved the harrassment of those provinces of
Egypt which lay in the same general region as Ethiopia, and which lay as
distant neighbors to it, on the other side of the deserts. Hence there is no
assertion of his conquering them, but only the statement that he passed through
the Libyans and the Ethiopians."
11:44 [Porphyry's view] "Even for this passage Porphyry has some
nebulous application to Antiochus, asserting that in his conflict with the
Egyptians, Libyans, and Ethiopians, passing through them he was to hear of wars
which had been stirred up against him in the North and the East."
11:45 [Jerome's view] "But it is impossible to state upon what
famous and holy mountain he took his seat, after he had proceeded to that
point. After all, it cannot be shown that he took up his seat between two seas,
and it would be foolish to interpret the two seas as being the two rivers of
Mesopotamia." [Jerome cites the source of Porphyry] "The account
[seemingly Porphyry] then says: "And he shall come even unto the summit of
that same mountain," ----supposedly in the province of Elam, which is the
easternmost Persian area. And there when he purposed to plunder the temple of
Diana, which contained countless sums of money, he was routed by the
barbarians, for they honored that shrine with a remarkable veneration. And
Antiochus, being overcome with grief, died in Tabes, a town in Persia."
[Jerome's critique of Porphyry] "By use of a most artificial line of
argument Porphyry has concocted these details as an affront to us; but even
though he were able to prove that these statements applied to Antiochus instead
of the Antichrist, what does that matter [reading quid instead of the inappropriate
qui] to us? For do we not on the basis of all the passages of Scripture prove
the coming of Christ and the falsehood of the Antichrist? For assume that these
things did refer to Antiochus, what injury does that inflict upon our religious
faith? Is it not true that in the earlier vision also, which contained a
prophecy fulfilled in Antiochus, there is some reference to the Antichrist? And
so let Porphyry banish his doubts and stick to manifest facts. Let him explain
the meaning of that rock which was hewn from the mountain without hands, and
which grew to be a great mountain and filled the earth, and which smashed to
pieces the fourfold image. And let him say who that Son of man is who is going
to come with clouds and stand before the Ancient of Days and have bestowed upon
him a kingdom which shall never come to an end, and who is going to be served
by all [reading omnes for omnem] nations, tribes, and language-groups. Porphyry
ignores these things which are so very clear and maintains that the prophecy
refers to the Jews, although we are well aware that they are to this very day
in a state of bondage. And he claims that the person who composed the book
under the name of Daniel made it all up in order to revive the hopes of his
countrymen. Not that he was able to foreknow all of future history, but rather
he records events that had already taken place. Thus Porphyry confines himself
to false claims in regard to the final vision, substituting rivers for the sea,
and positing a famous and holy mountain, Apedno even though he is unable to
furnish any historical source in which he has read about it." [Jerome's
explanation] "Those of our party, on the other hand, explain the final
chapter of this vision as relating to the Antichrist, and stating that during
his war against the Egyptians, Libyans, and Ethiopians, in which he shall smash
three of the ten horns, he is going to hear that war has been stirred up
against him in the regions of the North and East. Then he shall come with a
great host to crush and slay many people, and shall pitch his tent in Apedno
near Nicopolis, which was formerly called Emmaus, at the beginning of the
mountainous region in the province of Judaea. Finally he shall make his way
thence to go up to the Mount of Olives and ascend to the area of Jerusalem; and
this is what the Scripture means here: "And when he has pitched his
tent...." at the foothills of the mountainous province between two seas.
These are, of course, that which is now called the Dead Sea on the east, and the
Great Sea on the shore of which lie Caesarea, Joppa, Ashkelon, and Gazae. Then
he shall come up to the summit thereof, that is of the mountainous province, or
the apex of the Mount of Olives, which of course is called famous because our
Lord and Savior ascended from it to the Father. And no one shall be able to
assist the Antichrist as the Lord vents his fury upon him. Our school of
thought insists that Antichrist is going to perish in that spot from which the
Lord ascended to heaven. Apedno is a compound word, which upon analysis yields
the meaning of "his throne" (the Greek thronou autou), or (in Latin)
"thy throne". And the meaning is that he shall pitch his tent and his
throne between the seas upon the famous, holy mountain. Symmachus translated
this passage as follows (in Greek): "And he shall stretch out the tents of
his stable between the seas in the holy mountain of power, and he shall come
even unto its height"; which means in Latin: "And he shall stretch
forth the pavilions of his cavalry between the seas, upon the holy mountain of
power, and shall come even unto the apex of the mountain." Theodotion
renders it: "And he shall pitch his tent in Aphedanum between the seas in
the holy Mount Saba, and he shall come to the region thereof." Aquila says:
"And he shall set up the tent of his headquarters in (Greek) Aphadanon
between the seas, in the glorious, holy mountain, and he shall come even unto
its border." Only the Septuagint frees itself from the problem about the
name by translating: "And he shall establish his tent there between the
seas and the holy mountain of desire and he shall come to the hour of his final
end." Adhering to this rendering, Apollinarius omits all mention of the
name Apedno. I have gone into this matter at some length not only for the purpose
of exposing Porphyry's misrepresentation (for either he was ignorant of all
these matters or else he pretended not to know them) but also to show the
difficulty in Holy Scripture. And yet men who altogether lack experience lay
special claim to understanding it apart from the grace of God and the
scholarship of preceding generations. Now it should be observed that Hebrew has
no letter P, but uses instead the letter phe, which has the force of the Greek
phi. It is simply that in this particular place the Hebrews write the letter
phe, yet it is to be pronounced as p. But that the Antichrist is going to come
to the summit of the holy, famous mountain and perish there is a fact upon
which Isaiah expatiates more fully, saying: "The Lord shall in the holy
mountain cast down the face of the ruler of the darkness which is over all
races, and him who rules over all peoples, and the anointing which is applied
against (variant: with which he was anointed against) all the nations."
[This rather incoherent quotation varies very considerably from Jerome's own
rendering of Isaiah 25:7 in the Vulgate, and also from the Septuagint
rendering. The editors were apparently so dubious about it that they failed to
give the citation at all."
12:1 Time of trouble (page 299).
12:2 Jesus comes
12:3 Resurrection
Hectoris Pinti (1579) Catholic counter-Reformer
11:1 Darius the Mede (page 191).
11:2 Cyrus then Artaxerxes Ahasveros, Darius Longimanus, Darius Nothus
(according to the annals of the Persians by Metathenes). Then Artaxerxes
Darius. Jerome and Theodotion following Eusebius' Annals name Xerxes where
Metathenes named Artaxerxes. Herodotus also has Xerxes and Artaxerxes the same
(page 191b).
11:3 Alexander the Great (page 192).
11:4 Alexander the Great (pages 193-193b).
11:5 Pinti provides a complete list of the kings of Egypt and of Syria
after the death of Alexander the Great (page 194).
11:6 king of the north = Antochus Theos (page 194).
11:7 Ptolemy Philadelphi son was called Ptolemy Euergetes and Bernice
(page 194).
11:8
11:9
11:10 Seleuchus Callinicus sons were Seleuchus Ceraunus and Antiochus
Magnus (see page 194b).
11:11
11:12
11:13
11:14
11:15 king of the south = Ptolemy Philepator (page 195).
11:16 Antiochus the Great (page 195b).
11:17 Haec filia Antiochi magni appellabatur Cleopatra = this daughter
of Antiochus the Great is called Cleopatra (page 195b).
11:18 Scipio Nasica; Antiochus Epiphanes 2 Maccabees 1 (page 196).
11:19 Seleucus Philopator
11:20
11:21 Antiochus Epiphanes 1 Maccabees 3 (page 196). fuit hic Antiochus
typus Antichristi = this Antiochus was a type of the Antichrist (page 196)
depending on 2 Maccabees 9 and 1 Maccabees 1 for his information.
11:22 king of the south = Ptoleaeus Philometor; king of the north =
Antiochus Epiphanes, daughter = Cleopatra (page 196b).
11:23 Antiochus Epiphanes (196b)
11:24 Antiochus that seized Egypt
This is narrated by Suetonius who in this place, explaining following
Porphyry against who in this history is not in discrepancy with Jerome (page
196b) = a quibus in hac historia non discrepat Hieronymus. [van wyk note:
Actually, Pinti is not correct. See our treatment of Jerome on this verse.
Jerome part ways with Porphyry and made it clear that he did. Jerome no longer
accepted the Antiochus Epiphanes explanation of Porphyry between verses 24-45].
11:25 Nimirum Antiochi Epiphanis regis Syriae = Without doubt Antiochus
Epiphanes king of Syria (page 197). King of the south = Ptolemeus Philometor
(page 197).
11:26
11:27
11:28 Antiochus Epiphanes (197b). "This is against Jerusalem where
is the divine law, which is the Holy covenant called by God and is
protected" (page 197b).
11:29 Antiochus Epiphanes (198).
11:30 Antiochus Epiphanes [167 BCE] against the ships of the Romans
(page 198). Marcus Publius and against Jerusalem (page 198b).
11:31 It was namely, accustomed for Jews to call idols an abomination
(page 198b). Pinti connects I Maccabees with this verse thus connecting
Antiochus Epiphanes (167 BCE) with the events.
11:32 I Maccabees 7
11:33 I Maccabees 3 and 2 Maccabees 5
11:34
11:35 Hoc est multis calamitatibus afficietur viri iusti ut eorum
fortitudo & patieta & con & conflatia ceterq virtutes probentur =
this is that he will make many calamities against just men and their strength
and patience and molding for example, worth will be tested (page 199). Method
of Pinti is to cover the controversial passages [passages that may be applied
in his own times to the papacy] with a lexicon approach, that is, to seek
texts, biblical and non-biblical on the same theme and list them elaborately to
sidetrack the reader from the real issue at stake.
11:36 Pinti cites Psalm 49 here (page 199b). Antiochus Epiphanes (167
BCE) (page 200) 2 Maccabees 9; 1 Maccabees 6.
11:37 From Antiochus it passes on to the Antichrist who is governing in
its shadow = Ab Antiocho transit ad Antichristum cuius ille umbram gessit (page
200). He then discussed the following passages: Isaiah 45; Psalm 71; Isaiah 14
locus classicus for the Fall of Lucifer with Ezechiel 28 and 38. His point in
Ezechiel 38 is that Gog and Magog is actually the Goths. Paulus Orosius,
Eutropius, Blondus, Leonardus Arentinus and other books is telling that Italy,
Gallia, Hispania and great parts of Africa were attacked. Above the Roman ruler
of the world antique monuments were ornamented, the body of the beautiful
apostles Peter and Paul protected, endless sacred venerated and remains were
filled up, which episcopus is pontifex maximus, vicarius of Jesus Christ, of
the whole church the head and pastor, they destroyed and many other celebrated
works were executed and they called upon desolation = Alij scriptores narrant
vastarunt Italiam Galliam Hispaniam and magnam Africae partem. Insuper Romam
caput orbis, antiquitatem monuments ornatam, corporibus beatorum apostolorum
Petri and Pauli munitam, infinitis sanctorum venerandis reliqutis refertam,
cuius episcopus est pontifex maximus, Iesu Christi vicarius, totius ecclesiae
caput et pastor everterunt et multas alias celebres urbes ad exitiu et
vastitatem vocarunt. [van wyk note: VICARIUS FILII DEI: Pinti is refering to
the destruction of Rome but also of Catholicism by the Goths which he pinpoint
as the Antichrist and he calls the papal system IESU CHRISTI VICARIUS =
VICARIUS (FILII DEI) = 666] (page 206b). "This leader here, where the many
messengers of Antiochus Epiphanes is prophecied the wicked king of Syria unto
others himself he confer tyranny, without doubt to the Antichrist...."
[van wyk translation from the Latin]. "And which Antichrist is future
[post-1579] to be born of the Hebrews...." (page 206b). He refers to the
fact that the Hebrew [and he will have no concern for women] can mean both the
negative or the affirmative. The affirmative is translated such by many of
their Latin interpreters as Pinti says: ac ita transfert et multo rectius
Latinus noster interpres.
11:38 Maozim = est diabolus = is diabolic since the Antichrist will be
involved in the occult (page 207).
11:39 Antichrist promises to give them land (page 207).
11:40 Antiochus Epiphanes against the king of Egypt (page 207). Others
certainly of the Antichrist who Egypt will [post-1579] overthrow = alij vero de
Antichristo qui Aegyptu profligabit. "It can be understand of both places,
nevertheless especially of the Antichrist to be understand which also we say,
Antiochus casting a shadow" (page 207). Pinti said that Jerome understood
it the same.
11:41 And many were toppled, without doubt [nimirum] the time of
Antiochus [167 BCE], which not only many men, but many regions were to him
overthrown. But many stood firm against the Antichrist. (page 206b) = et multi
corruent nimirum tempore Antiochi, quando non solum multi homines sed multae
regiones ab eo profligabuntur. At multo plurestem pore Antichristi. Pinti
interprets Transjordan as the place which is connected to Revelation 12 (206b).
11:42
11:43
11:44
11:45 Antichrist will [post-1579] ascend to this fortress and there to
life the false Messiah move.... (page 204).
12:1
12:2
12:3
Medieval
Jewish interpretation of Daniel 11
Abarbanel, Malbim, Rashi, Metsudath David, Ibn Ezra
11:1
11:2
11:3
11:4
11:5
11:6
11:7
11:8
11:9
11:10
11:11
11:12
11:13
11:14
11:15
11:16
11:17
11:18
11:19
11:20 Matthatias and his sons (Rashi); taxes were taken from Judea by
the Romans (Malbim);
11:21 In the vision of 7:8 he is described as the Little Horn (Malbim)
11:22 Those who were against the accession of Antiochus to the throne
(Rashi). The Hasmonean king to whom the Romans made a covenant and broke it
(Rashi). It refers to Egypt (Abarbanel).
11:23
11:24 Conquering Egypt over which he rules (Abarbanel, Malbim).
11:25 They have accepted bribes from Antiochus (Abarbanel, Malbim).
11:26
11:27 They will harm Judea (Rashi). The time appointed was the time
during which Antiochus was allowed by God to domineer Egypt until his death
(Abarbanel, Malbim).
11:28
11:29 After he heard that the two brothers Ptolemy united (Malbim).
11:30
11:31
11:32
11:33
11:34
11:35 "They shall stumble" = "They will err in their
calculations of the date of redemption" (Rashi). They will suffer
martyrdom (Abarbanel).
11:36 "the king" Constantine (Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel); The
kingdom of Rome (Rashi). "Above every god" = He abolished idol
worship and implemented his religion (Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel, Malbim). "the
indignation" = He will succeed until God's anger against Israel will end
(Rashi, Metsudath David). "determined" = ordained by God (Malbim).
11:37 "the gods of the fathers" = Jupiter and Venus
(Abarbanel, Metsudath David). "the desire of women" = "Abarbanel
sees this as a reference to the practice of celibacy instituted for the priests
by the pope" (Slotki 1951[1st], 1993: 98). "nor any god" =
"Abarbanel points out that although the Christian religion rejected the
worship of other gods and accepted the belief and worship of the Prime Cause
(one God), they erred in adding the corporeal image of a human being, investing
him with godly attributes" (Slotki 1951[1st], 1993: 98).
11:38 "the god of strongholds" = "Following the
commentary of Abarbanel the understanding is that he will honour one God but
will append the belief and worship to the image of the founder of Christianity,
a practice which his fathers knew not (cf. Malbim) (Slotki 1951[1st], 1993:
98).
11:39
11:40 "at the end of time" = At the time that the promised
redemption of Israel shall approach (Rashi).
11:41
11:42 "stretch forth his hand" = "To smite and destroy
(Metsudath David); "to plunder" = (Malbim) ((Slotki 1951[1st], 1993:
100).
11:43 "at his steps" = "Either placing themselves at his
beck and call (Ibn Ezra), or being trampled under the feet of his army (Ralbag)"
(Slotki 1951[1st], 1993: 100).
11:44 "east...north" = "Ibn Ezra and Metsudath David
understand the tidings out of the east and the north as referring to the vision
of the little horn mentioned in vii. 8 representing the kingdom of Ishmael and
their religion of Islam" (Slotki 1951[1st], 1993: 100).
11:45 "came to his end" = "The collection of tents which
formed the royal headquarters (Metsudath Zion). "come to his end" =
"Malbim points out the similarity to the prophecy of Ezekiel xxxix. 2, 4,
11 regarding the fall of the king of Magog" (Slotki 1951[1st], 1993: 98).
12:1
12:2
12:3
Japheth ibn ali Halevi (ca. 960 CE)
11:1 "We are not justified in setting aside the literal meaning of
the Word of God or of His prophets, except where that literal meaning is
hindered or precluded because it is contradicted by reason or by a clear
text" by D. S. Margoliouth's translation as reproduced by Hartwig
Hirschfeld and Y. Yaron in Angels and Fire: Yefet ben `Eli Halewi on Dani'el
and Nahum (Al-Qirqisani Center for the Promotion of Karaite Studies, 2003) p.
169.
11:2 Cyrus then Ahasuerus (Mordecai's patron), Artaxerxes the Less,
Darius the Persian; "the fourth" Artaxerxes, patron of Ezra and
Nehemiah (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 173).
11:3 Alexander the Mighty "His history is well known" (Japheth
in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 173).
11:4 "... in spite of these four [generals] holding the four
quarters of the globe, they had no royal control or might like
Alexander's" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 174). "Dynasty
after dynasty will spring up on the death of these four, until 180 years have
passed, according to the historical records" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and
Yaron 2003: 174; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 58).
11:5 "None of the four are mentioned, however, except the king of
the north and the king of the south. Probably, therefore, the kings of the west
and of the east remained quietly in their respective quarters, not seeking to
acquire any other, and there was no war between them. Consequently, the Scripture
does not mention them; whereas it mentions the kings of the south and of the
north, because they engaged in eventful wars" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and
Yaron 2003: 175). "...he being, in fact, the king of Rome (who is the king
of the south)..." (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 175; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 59).
11:6 NON-SPECIFIC BUT SPECULATIVE "This is like what Sennacheriv,
king of Asshur demanded of Hezekiah....The king of the north, though, would not
agree to this...." (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 176).
11:7 NON-SPECIFIC BUT SPECULATIVE "and he will overpower them"
translated in Arabic as "and he will deal with them" applied by
Japheth to "This is like what the king of Asshur did with the calves of
Israel (Hosea 10.6)" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 178).
11:8 NON-SPECIFIC BUT SPECULATIVE
11:9 NON-SPECIFIC BUT SPECULATIVE. Japheth applied Genesis 21:21 in
order to explain that the king of the north "will remain alive"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 179).
11:10 NON-SPECIFIC BUT SPECULATIVE. [Maybe he thinks it is the Romans,
see verse 12 below].
11:11 NON-SPECIFIC BUT SPECULATIVE. [Maybe he thinks it is the Romans,
see verse 12 below].
11:12 "He will not prevail" said Japheth "I am inclined
to think that the king of the south who burnt the Temple and carried our people
captive is meant; from which time the Romans have been strong, their empire has
prevailed, and they have become a 'mighty terrible monster'. You must know that
these wars covered many years, about two hundred; the pronouns therefore do not
refer to individuals, but to the empire" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron
2003: 181; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 61). [Thus: 70-73 CE with the
destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman forces].
11:13 "King of North" "Probably this king of the north is
not the same as the one who fled" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003:
182; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 61). "And at the end of the times,
years (instead of 'at the end of years') refers to the prophecy of the seventy
weeks. Or, it may mean after the end of years during which there was an
agreement between them, made after the defeat, and they obeyed the king of the
south because of his power" (idem).
11:14 "The children of the breakers of your people"
"refers, it ["it" NOTE: Probably not Japheth but a source he is
acquainted with] is said, to the followers of Jesus, said by the Christians to
be the Messiah; those followers who made the Gospel...." (Japheth in
Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 182; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 61). "But
they will fall" = Japheth THEORY I: "if this refers to the followers
of Jesus, it wiill mean 'they will leave the religion'. Japheth THEORY II:
"if to the nation of Israel, then it means that Israel after this will
fall". "First we were ruined by our kings and false prophets, who
were the cause of the cessation of our empire and of our captivity; then these
Chrstians have been the cause of our ruin and destruction during the Captivity;
and some went astray at the beginning of the empire of the Little Horn, and
also ruined us" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 183; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 62).
11:15 "The king of the north is to come to the land of Rome and
besiege the capital city and take it (and a well-fenced city); i.e. Constantinople"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 184; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 62).
11:16 Romans (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 184; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 62).
11:17 "daugther of women" = "the holy city, it is said;
signifying that he is to ravage certain places consecrated to the Roman
worship" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 185; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 63).
11:18 "He will invade the islands" = "referring perhaps
to the 'frontier-land,' sc. Tarsus, Cyprus, etc." (Japheth in Hirschfeld
and Yaron 2003: 185; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 63). King of the north =
"The seat of the king of the north was in the province of Baghdad. This is
the last war between the two kings" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003:
186; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 63).
11:19 "After doing all this he shall return to Baghdad, his royal
seat...." (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 187; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 63).
11:20 Japheth continued "Those who know this history tell us that
the Arabs seized the place while the people were engaged in eating and
drinking. They seized the king and killed him. He was last of the Magus who
reigned in Baghdad; from whom the Arab kings, who still hold it, took it"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 187; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 63).
11:21 "Every king of the dynasties mentioned to this point had
possessed some spirit and generosity except this one, who had none"
Japheth continued "Those who know this history tell us that the Arabs
seized the place while the people were engaged in eating and drinking. They
seized the king and killed him. He was last of the Magus who reigned in
Baghdad; from whom the Arab kings, who still hold it, took it" (Japheth in
Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 188; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 64).
11:22 "and with the prince of the covenant" = "said to be
the ruler of Rome" Japheth continued "Those who know this history
tell us that the Arabs seized the place while the people were engaged in eating
and drinking. They seized the king and killed him. He was last of the Magus who
reigned in Baghdad; from whom the Arab kings, who still hold it, took it"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 188; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 64).
11:23 "and after the league" = "said to refer to the follower
of the 'Man of Wind' (Muhammed), Omar one of the 'ten'. He is to deal
deceitfully with Israel, and others; their story is well known" Japheth
continued "Those who know this history tell us that the Arabs seized the
place while the people were engaged in eating and drinking. They seized the
king and killed him. He was last of the Magus who reigned in Baghdad; from whom
the Arab kings, who still hold it, took it" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and
Yaron 2003: 189; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 64).
11:24 "with security" = "in verse 21 referred to the 'Man
of Wind'; here it refers to Omar" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003:
189; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 64). "against the strongholds" =
"certain fortresses in the province of Iraq" (idem).
11:25 "This battle was fought, between Omar ibn El-Khathab and the
Romans in Syria. Omar, the historians say, entered Jerusalem, and the king of
Rome made ready to fight with him, and they arrayed battle in the plain of
'Amwas, near Jerusalem" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 190; also
D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 65).
11:26 NO COMMENT
11:27 "Both these kings" = "Arabia and Rome"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 191; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 65).
"Their hearts shall be to do mischief" = "as it is well known
that the Moslems and Christians do" (idem). "The verse covers the
long period from the rise of Islam to the end of the Captivity" (Japheth
in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 192; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 66).
11:28 "and his heart" = "The person alluded to is said to
have been a bitter enemy of Israel (Omar ibn El-Khathab)" (Japheth in
Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 193; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 66).
11:29 "With this verse ends the account of what happened at the
rise of the power of Ishmael. From this verse commences the notice of what is
to happen at the close of their power" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron
2003: 193; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 66).
11:30 "and shall have indignation against the holy covenant" =
"This is an event in the future. It has not yet come to pass"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 195; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 67).
[TURNING-POINT FOR JAPHETH FROM WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO WHAT WILL HAPPEN]
11:31 "they shall remove the continual" = "they shall put
a stop to the Hagg (pilgrimage); men shall not go on pilgrimages thither
thereafter, nor pray as was their wont, nor celebrate the tenth day according
to their custom; it is called continual because the institution was perpetual;
they never relaxed the Hagg" "And they shall make the abomination
desolate" = Japheth THEORY I: "refer to the image itself, it must
mean that it will be left fallen, after having been erect and protected;"
Japheth THEORY II: "but if we refer them to its place, then the meaning
will be that place will be left desolate, waste, unapproached...." Japheth
THEORY III: "Thirdly, we refer it to its worshippers, it will mean that
they will grieve at the ruin that has overtaken their sanctuary, even as Israel
has grieved ever since ruin overtook them, and their sanctuary was laid
waste" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 196; also D. S. Margoliouth
[1889]: 67). [JAPHETH SPECULATE WHAT MAY HAPPEN]
11:32 "He shall deceive them" = "some shall go out from
our people for certain worldly reasons, and shall thake verses of Scripture
spoken concerning the Messiah which they shall divert to the temporal ruler,
and shall interpret of him, explaining away the words sabbath and feast,
running themselves and departing from religion" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and
Yaron 2003: 197; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 68). [JAPHETH SPECULATE WHAT
MAY HAPPEN]
11:33 "So will this prince deal with Israel; some he will kill with
the sword, others by fire, some he will afflict by captivity or by plundering
their slaves and property" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 197;
also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 68). "They shall fall" = "the
persons who follow the wise" (idem).
11:34 NON-SPECIFIC
11:35 "...the falling of the teachers be by sword and flame, they
will say 'if God has delivered over our teachers, what can we expect?"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 199; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 69).
[JAPHETH SPECULATE WHAT MAY HAPPEN]
11:36 Japheth THEORY I: "possibly he refers to the empire generally
from the establishment of the state of Ishmael to the end of their
history..." or Japheth THEORY II: "or he may refer to the chief of
these 'arms' who shall waste the sanctuary, and stop the Hagg. Both views are
possible" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 199; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 69). [JAPHETH SPECULATE WHAT MAY HAPPEN]
11:37 "neither shall he regard the god of his fathers" Japheth
THEORY I: "Most probably it means that he will profess to serve the
Almighty Creator, but iwll say of him what is impossible". Japheth THEORY
II: "If it refer to the kingdom (i.e. the Caliphate) since its rise, the
fact is shewn in their language and the popular belief, but if it refer to this
last, then it is again a statement about the system which he will
promulgate" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 202; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 70). [JAPHETH SPECULATE WHAT MAY HAPPEN]
11:38 "god of fortresses" Japheth THEORY I: "either the
name of a particular idol, Alat or El-Uzza as some have thought - both are
familiar - or some other" Japheth THEORY II: "...may refer to a
particular people of that name, mentioned again in verse 39. They then will
have a god and a religion which he will think fit to reverence and not to
overthrow" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 202; also D. S. Margoliouth
[1889]: 70). [JAPHETH SPECULATE WHAT MAY HAPPEN]
11:39
11:40 "And at the time of the end" = "This expression
includes two things: (1) the end of the success of this dynasty; (2) the end of
the indignation against Israel" ..."I refer to certain battles
wherein he has taken from the Moslems Antioch, Tarsus, Ayn Zarbah and that
region; but more events are still to come. The king of the north has not as yet
done anything....The king of the north that they shall whirl against him,
because he shall come from near the Caspian Gates" (Japheth in Hirschfeld
and Yaron 2003: 202; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 70). Japheth explains the
terms "king of the north" and "king of the south" as
follows: "We promised that when we came to this verse we would explain the
importance of the phrases 'king of the north,' 'king of the south.' Many
scholars suppose the king of the north refers to the king of Arabia, because
the latter took Baghdad from the king of the north, which had been the royal
city of the Magus. We will show how this difficulty can be solved. You must
know that the four kingdoms mentioned in the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar and
Daniel are divided as follows. The first is a world-empire. Now, the rulers of
the whole world are not named after any particular quarter, but after their
principal city, e.g. king of Babylon; not 'king of the east, west,' etc. No
such phrase can be found used of the king of the Chaldees, nor of the kings of
the Medes and Persians, nor of Alexander, the first king of the Greeks. Only
after his death, when his kingdom was divided among his four scholars (11.4),
does he begin to speak of a 'king of the north' or 'of the south.' Now, if the
empire of Islam were in any one of the quarters - north or south- we might very
well use the terms 'king of the north' or 'of the south.' As, however, that
empire has seized countries in all four quarters, it cannot be named after any
one of them. This principle is obviously correct. The king of Islam then can be
neither. Therefore, he says the king of the south will push at him, sc. at the
king mentioned in ver. 36. If the king of the south pushes at him, he cannot be
the king of the south. Similarly, he says with reference to him that the king
of the north will whirl against him, i.e. come against him Uke a whirlwind. It
is clear, then, that the king of Islam cannot be king of the north. With
chariots and with horsemen and with many ships: he does not specify which of
the two will come with them. Probably, the king of the north will come to him
with chariots and horsemen, while the king of the south does so on the sea with
ships: cp. Num. 24.24. Observe he will came, not they; which would have
referred to both kings together, so we would have supposed the two would assist
each other against him. Now, we would not know which will come from the words
of Daniel. However, this has been explained by another prophet, Joel son of
Bethuel. He has written three chapters (beginning respectively at 1.21, 11.1,
and 3.9); the first of which refers to Nebuchadnezzar, the second to the king
of the north mentioned here (11.20 I will remove far off from you the northern;
we will presently explain how this will be) 'the third to Gog.' The Islamic
prince established at Baghdad- not the Abbaside - is from the north. Now, they
were originally unbelievers, but will be associated with the Abbaside Caliph.
The chief of these arms will certainly take that city, sc. Baghdad. They will
be beaten back before him; and, perhaps, he will kill some of them. After this,
they will rise up against those who repulsed them, and make for Babylon, as the
prophets foretold. See Isaiah 13.1, Jeremiah 11. They say of them they will not
refine silver or gold, inasmuch as they will only desire vengeance for their
sufferings at the hands of those who took their city, and will gather together
and fight against them. They are referred to here in the words and the king of
the north will sweep against him. The words 'he will enter into the countries,
and will overflow and pass through' indicate that he will enter the realm of
the king who took Baghdad from the hands of the Abbasides, and will conquer the
land of Babylon. At his arrival, a number of Israelites will go out, directing
their steps to the land of Israel; cp. Jeremiah 1.5. Then the king of the north
will direct his steps towards the territory of this king. He will go out from
Babylon to Syria, conquering every city he passes, it not being his primary
intention to have a royal throne established for him, but only to destroy the
cities that are under the power of the LORD of Islam. He will kill all whom he
meets (he will stretch forth his hand also upon the countries); and he is to
come to the land of Israel (he will enter also into the glorious land)"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 204-206; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]:
71-72). [ONE MUST KEEP IN MIND HERE THAT THIS PART OF THE PROPHECY IS NOT
ESTEEMED BY JAPHETH TO BE FULFILLED YET, THUS THERE IS A GREAT AMOUNT OF
SPECULATION HERE.
11:41 "Edom" = "Djebel-eshshara.... he cannot pass them
over through weakness, since these countries are not more powerful than Babylon
and Egypt" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 206; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 72).
11:42 "Egypt" = "that too being Islamitic territory"
(Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 206; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 73).
11:43 "The Libyans and Ethiopians will be at his steps: certain
Ethiopians and Libyans &. follow him at the time; or, perhaps, on his stay
in Egypt he will destroy the Ethiopians and Libyans, who are in Egyptian
territory" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron 2003: 206; also D. S.
Margoliouth [1889]: 73). [JAPHETH SPECULATE WHAT MAY HAPPEN]
11:44 "But news will trouble him: when he comes to the western
frontier of the province of Egypt, he will receive tidings from the east and
the north, sc. of the entrance of Israel from the wilderness into Palestine, as
we will explain at length afterwards. When they enter it from the wilderness,
they will conquer it, and their enemies will be beaten back before them. When
this reaches the king of the north, who will be at the time at the edge of
Egypt, he will return to Syria to destroy and utterly make away with many, i.e.
Israel, who entered in large numbers" (Japheth in Hirschfeld and Yaron
2003: 209; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 73). [JAPHETH SPECULATE WHAT MAY
HAPPEN]
11:45 "But when the news of his return reaches Israel, they will
gather together on Mount Zion, and do what Joel says (chap. 11 and fell.). This
they will do at the time when he plants the tents of his palace. It is thought
that he will pitch his tents at Amwas (now, between that place and Jerusalem
are four parasangs); or else he will encamp in the wilderness of Tekoa, which
also is a vast plain. When he spreads out his tents there, intending to come to
them the next morning in Jerusalem, God will send His angel Michael, who will
destroy his entire army. They will all die, and remain cast about, rotting on
the face of the plain until they decompose and stink (v. Joel 1.50.).
Therefore, we know that this section deals with the king of the north, and
relates what will happen to Israel at his coming" (Japheth in Hirschfeld
and Yaron 2003: 209; also D. S. Margoliouth [1889]: 73). [JAPHETH SPECULATE
WHAT MAY HAPPEN]
12:1
12:2
12:3
Van Wyk's findings in Daniel 11 (2001-2005 ongoing)
11:1ff pax-medo persica
11:3ff pax-hellenica
11:7ff pax-romana
11:21 Justinian and the start of the pax-vaticana
11:21-35 pax-vaticana 538-1798 cf. [FIRST BEAST of Rev. 13]
11:36 Origin of the pax-constitutiones = USA (1776ff.)
cf. [US = SECOND BEAST Rev. 13]
11:37-39 Characteristics of the pax-constititones [US = SECOND BEAST
Rev. 13]
11:40 911, Bin Laden and Saddam, US under attack. [US = SECOND BEAST
Rev. 13]
11:41 Jordan an ally of US [US = SECOND BEAST Rev. 13]
11:42 Egypt financial help since 1974 with Nixon and Sadat.
[US = SECOND BEAST Rev. 13]
11:43 Ghaddafi of Libya became an ally of US. [US = SECOND BEAST Rev.
13]
11:44 Who is “east” and who is North” from Shushan where Daniel was? Is
it Teheran (Iran) and IS (Iraq and Syria)? [US = SECOND BEAST Rev. 13]
11:45 Move by Trump of Embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem in 2017. Some
Temple issue in the future? Impeachment of some President of the USA? [=SECOND
BEAST Rev. 13]