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


11:5 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)



11:10 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



11:14 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


11:19 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).





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



11:14 "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


11:19 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).



11:27 "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.


11:33 Waldenses, Lollards, Hussites, Lutherans, Anabaptists, Huguenots



11:36 Medieval papacy (page 296).


11:38 Medieval popes hiring armies for political objectives (page 296).


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.





11:45 "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


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


11:11 LEB = HEART SOUTH 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).



11:19 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


11:24 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).


11:43 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




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).


11:9 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).


11:13 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).



11:45 "The whole passage is a military one and fits appropriately into the rest of the prophecy" (page 317).








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."


11:13 [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."


11:19 [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...."




11:24 [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...."


11:27 "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.



11:30 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).


11:40 [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).



11:10 Seleuchus Callinicus sons were Seleuchus Ceraunus and Antiochus Magnus (see page 194b).





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


11:21 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).



11:28 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


11:35 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).




11:45 Antichrist will [post-1579] ascend to this fortress and there to life the false Messiah move.... (page 204).















Medieval Jewish interpretation of Daniel 11


Abarbanel, Malbim, Rashi, Metsudath David, Ibn Ezra




















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).


11:24 Conquering Egypt over which he rules (Abarbanel, Malbim).

11:25 They have accepted bribes from Antiochus (Abarbanel, Malbim).


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).


11:29 After he heard that the two brothers Ptolemy united (Malbim).






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).


11:40 "at the end of time" = At the time that the promised redemption of Israel shall approach (Rashi).


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).








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).


11:9 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).


11:27 "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).


11:35 "...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]


11:40 "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]







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.


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]