2

Since the instructions mention I should ask a question as opposed to a discussion, I would like to ask two:

Specific question on Daniel 11: 5-6; Assuming the verses after 4 are NOT speaking about the post Alexander kingdoms (Ptolemy, etc.,) does anyone have a different interpretation on the next several verses - 5 to say 20?

General question: I am studying Daniel and am currently beginning chapter 11 - this is clearly a monster, that is, unless you accept most of the interpretations attaching the above verses to the post Alexander period and Antiochus, etc. To me that does not make sense - this should be a more detailed understanding of the Pagan and Papal powers and the Messiah and the Jewish people. I don't believe God would spend this amount of prophetic capital on a transitional group that really does not have a significant "play" in God's Plan of Salvation! Consequently, I am in need of finding some folks who are brighter than I in many ways of brain storming chapter 11 - not simply going over what is already out there... If anyone is interested, please also feel free to contact me at kincadect@hotmail.com. Thank you very much and I hope to hear from you soon, Charlie

5
  • there are heaps of good commentaries with lots of different interpretations for your read. – Dottard Feb 19 '20 at 3:31
  • 1
    It sounds to me you are not looking for an answer. It sounds more like you are wanting someone to agree with your interpretation of Daniel 11. – oldhermit Mar 7 '20 at 12:09
  • 1
    I am not sure why you would/have come to such a conclusion.. but everyone sees things differently. – Charlie744 Mar 8 '20 at 13:05
  • Charlie744: Chpt 11 covers the struggle of two kings, the king of the north and the king of the south, much of the prophecy has been fulfilled to our days and the rest no doubt will also come true. Up to the Pentecost of 33 C.E., the Israelites were God's people, but after that date, God chooses Jesus followers to be his people,the "Israel of God" Acts 2:1-4 and Gal. 6:15-16. The struggle of the two kings continues to our days (Daniel 10:14) and are to be understood in conjunction with John's vision, Rev.chpts 11 and 12 – Ozzie Ozzie Jul 11 '20 at 8:30
  • Ozzie, thank you! I can not agree with you more. It is the spiritual battle until His second coming between the 2 kings... – Charlie744 Jul 12 '20 at 11:59
2

These are rhetorical questions, so I hope they don't get edited out. Isn't the subject of Daniel God's dealing with Israel, their destiny as a nation?

Seventy weeks are apportioned for your people and for your holy city, to close the transgression, and to make an end of sins...Dan 9:24.

Of course there are lessons on loving God, overcoming idols, the veil against the true God which lies on humanity naturally. The first six chapters cover the kind of persons Daniel and his companions were. We see God's control and plan in making them officials in their capturing country. (How they obeyed God, seeking the peace of Babylon).

Babylon's nature is explored in its very emperors, Nebuchadnezzar and his grandson(? nonrhetorical). God even deals personally with Nebuchadnezzar, maybe successfully to save him (? nonrh.) And there's the opening basic vision of four world empires followed by Messiah's (second) coming to destroy them and take over. Daniel experienced "all" the first empire and the start of the second.

I say nation of Israel because though Christ, God's Messiah, is revealed to Daniel, and even one of the most striking prophecies of His death and the time of it, Israel as a nation still won't receive Him until the very end of this age (9:24-27). This is "seconded" in the Lord Jesus in Matthew 21 & 24 and in Romans 11 by Paul, quoting Isaiah (who also prophesied Jehovah's using of Babylon to discipline His people).

For I do not want you, brothers, to be ignorant of this mystery (lest you be wise in yourselves), that hardness has come upon Israel in part, until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in; and thus all Israel will be saved, as it is written, "The Deliverer will come out of Zion; He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob. And this is the covenant from Me with them, when I take away their sins." According to the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but according to the selection they are beloved for the fathers' sake. For the gracious gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you once disobeyed God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience, so these also now have disobeyed, so that because of the mercy shown to you they also now may be shown mercy. For God has shut up all in disobedience that He might show mercy to all. O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and untraceable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has become His counselor? Or who has first given to Him, and it will be repaid to him? Because out from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.

[Irrevocable. Which also, btw, puts the lie to the evil Pelagianistic teaching that New Testament Christians can lose their salvation eternally, or lose their eternal salvation.]

Therefore I say to you that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you and shall be given to a nation producing its fruit......But learn the parable from the fig tree: As soon as its branch has become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that the summer is near.


Although nominally Christian Catholicism and Orthodoxy, and pagans like Hitler, physically persecuted both genuine Christians and also Jews (and others), the nation of Israel in their promised land has a history of huge dealing by (Asssyria and) Babylon and Persia (positive in a way) and Greece and ultimately Rome, up through 70 AD and eventually for 7 more years, in particular 3 1/2. Dan 9:26 reveals a deliberate gap in Israel's prophecy between the end of their "69th" week of years and Israel's final seven years to come.

God's gift of His Son, grace, is free to anyone who believes, Jewish or Gentile. But God did have a particular economy to spread to the Gentiles (through Paul to start), and God will save spiritually the remnant physical nation of Israel when they physically see Him whom they pierced when He physically returns to also physically deliver them from Antichrist. That's why Daniel 11 is a detail on Greece. And also message to the whole world, or anyone who can read, of the situation at the coming end. Antiochus Epiphanes in particular detailedly prefigures the Antichrist.

0

You are correct in believing that this to be not simply an extension of those post Alexander Kingdoms. This Chapter directly relates to Daniel's "words" spoken in chapter 7, verses 19-20.

Then I would know the truth of the fourth beast, which was diverse from all the others, exceeding dreadful, whose teeth were of iron, and his nails of brass; which devoured, brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with his feet; And of the ten horns that were in his head, and of the other which came up, and before whom three fell; even of that horn that had eyes, and a mouth that spake very great things, whose look was more stout than his fellows.

His question concerning the "truth" of that fourth beast arose out of the revelation provided him in Daniel 7:7-8:

After this I saw in the night visions, and behold a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly; and it had great iron teeth: it devoured and brake in pieces, and stamped the residue with the feet of it: and it was diverse from all the beasts that were before it; and it had ten horns. I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them another little horn, before whom there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots: and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking great things.

These ten "horns" are kings, not Papal powers, because this entire portion points forward toward that "visible" "kingdom of heaven" with Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham, ruling on this earth, as demanded by Daniel 2:44-45:

And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure. (My emphasis)

The Papal powers indeed ravished early Christians, but this chapter is still dealing with the children of Israel--not the church.

In order to get a grasp on chapter 11, we must recognize and account for all ten kings plus the little horn, including the three plucked up kings. These kings must match the seven kings, plus the eighth that is of he seven, of Revelation 17, 9-11:

And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

Daniel lists all ten kings, including the three who will be plucked up, whereas John's revelation ignores those three as having already been plucked up--eliminated. This makes the little horn of Daniel 7:7-8 one and the same as the eighth horn--the beast--of Revelation. John's revelation occurred during the sixth king--Nero--(five had already fallen).

Daniel chapter 11 more particularly addresses that fourth beast--the Roman Empire. Daniel 11:1-4 provides a brief description of the transition from the Medes and Persians right up to and through Alexander the Great, the last king of the Greek world-order. When Alexander the Great died, all that Babylonian world order kingdom as extended and transformed to Greece was divided among four regions.

Daniel 11:5-6:

Daniel 11:5-6 introduced Julius Caesar. By aligning himself with Cleopatra while in Egypt, he used his military and political skills to begin to transform those four scattered Greek powers into two legs of a new type of Roman republic. He changed the constitution of the old Roman republic. He managed to become a military dictator for life with authority to pass that dictatorship to his heir. He was also the first Roman to be officially “deified” as a god. With his strong military, headed by commanders such as Octavian, his adopted son and heir to his dictatorship, he was also able to secure and maintain many of the powers of Rome over all those regions. He gathered together many of the regional parts into that Roman world order.

Octavian, a/k/a Caesar Augustus, a/k/a Augustus was the adopted son and the recognized heir of the previously deified Julius Caesar. Accordingly, he assumed the title of Divi filius--he divine son of the divine. Before becoming the first emperor, he was a high level military commander under Julius Caesar. He had great military accomplishments toward building that Roman world order by defeating scattered warring territories during an early civil war. Through his negotiations with the Senate, he retained sole autocratic power as a military dictator.

Augustus then established his imperial power over Rome while at the same time retaining some of the Roman Free Republic characteristics. Rome kept its senate, administrator and—for a short time—legislative bodies, together with the position of the new emperor. Augustus was the second of the ten horns of that fourth beast—that increasingly powerful and quick forming Roman world-order empire. **NOTE:**Caesar Augustus was the emperor during the time that Jesus Christ was born. He issued that famous decree that “all the world should be taxed” (Luke 2:1-5)

Daniel 11:10-19 reveals that a prince—no doubt Tiberius—would finally be victorious in the final war with the king of the south that was fiercely waged under Augustus. Following Augustus’ death, Tiberius succeeded him in 14 AD. The reign of Tiberius lasted until 37 AD, well beyond the earthly ministries of John the Baptist and of Jesus Christ and well into the church age. The glorification of Christ had taken place under Tiberius’ reign in 30 AD marking the end of the first 69 weeks of years of Daniel’s prophecy. Even after that, the Jews still had access to, and the use of, the City of Jerusalem and the temple. Tiberius was the third horn of that fourth beast.

BECAUSE the line of Roman emperor's was now into the church age and beyond the 69th week of Daniel, emperors four, five and six--Caligula, Claudius, and Nero--are not mentioned in chapter 11. They have no import as to the matters that pertain exclusively to the 70 weeks of years determined upon children of Israel, even though "the church" became greatly persecuted under Nero and beyond.

The Three plucked up kings:

Between the extremely short period of June of 68 and December of 69 three emperors began and ended their reign as anarchists under civil war conditions. After Nero took his own life, Servius Sulpicius Galba, a/k/a Galba, joined the civil war with support from Hispania and other regions, but not from all of them. He was named emperor by promising bribes to the Praetorians. Galba ruled for less than a year before being lynched by the Praetorians for breaking his promise on those bribes. The Praetorians proclaimed Marcus Salvius Otho, a/k/a Otho, emperor who ruled for only 91 days before his army surrendered to the Rhine army that was under Avlvs Vitellius, a/k/a Vitellius. Vitellius, having the support of those German forces, then seized power. When the Flavians stormed the Praetorian barracks, they lynched Vitellius after he had ruled slightly more than eight months.

NOTE: These three rogue horns were also not pertinent to the 70 weeks of years. Accordingly, none of their actions are recorded in chapter 11. HOWEVER, there is that remaining matter of the little horn destroying the City of Jerusalem.

Therefore, after having already accounted for the first six, plus the three who were plucked up, Daniel 11:20 begins describing this notorious tenth horn as a noteworthy “raiser of taxes” who would stand up in his estate “in the glory of the kingdom”:

Then shall stand up in his estate a raiser of taxes in the glory of the kingdom: but within few days he shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle.

Titus Flavius Sabinus Vespasianus, a/k/a Vespasian, having put down the anarchy and after the killing of Vitellius, would become that tenth horn of the Roman world-order empire. So Vespasian did not die a violent death. This clearly identifies him as the "verse-20" horn because Julius Caesar was assassinated. Moreover, following Augustus and Tiberius, who purportedly died of natural causes, the next six emperors were murdered, killed in battle, or died in another manner of strife. Caligula was assassinated. Claudius was poisoned—possibly by his wife. Nero committed suicide. Galba was murdered. Otho committed suicide. Vitellius was murdered by Vespasian’s troops. But Vespasian died of natural causes, not because of any contentious event or situation.

Titus—the prince of the covenant

Titus Flavius Sabinus Vespasianus, a/k/a Titus, was Vespasian’s natural born heir who matches the description of the one described as “the prince of the covenant” in Daniel 11:21-22:

And in his estate shall stand up a vile person, to whom they shall not give the honour of the kingdom: but he shall come in peaceably, and obtain the kingdom by flatteries. And with the arms of a flood shall they be overflown from before him, and shall be broken; yea, also the prince of the covenant.

Of course, we know that Titus was the "prince" and heir of Vespasian who would come not as an emperor, but as a prince--that little horn--who would destroy the city, then eventually become emperor then die. This man will be "resurrected" as that eighth king of Revelation--that beast--who is of the seven remaining after eliminating those "three plucked up horns". He will be resurrected to be cast alive into the lake of fire along with the false prophet (also resurrected). They MUST BE resurrected before their judgment because it is appointed unto man to once die, then after that the judgment. NO MAN, except he is resurrected, could withstand being cast alive into that "lake of fire for eternity."

This portion concerning Vespasian and Titus is a necessary part of Daniel chapter 11 because it accounts for that part of Daniel 9:25-26 which pertains to the destruction of the city and the sanctuary FOLLOWING the 69th week, but not yet into the 70th week. So these matters were of extreme importance to Daniel and were the very point of his request for more information in Daniel 7:19-20.

4
  • Back in Feb. I tried to solicit some help in interpreting chapter 11 ASSUMING it did not speak of AE... 11 is not a history lesson on AE- a non-important thug between the last 2 kingdoms. The last kingdom begins with pagan Rome and ends at His second coming- God is not interested in identifying specific individuals or conflicts for the last 2000 years! This last period is critical for Him to try and reveal His Plan of Salvation and the “big picture “ events ... Since Feb. I have learned a lot and I can give two important keys to interpreting 11.... I will follow / complete in next text. – Charlie744 Jul 7 '20 at 3:57
  • The two keys of 11 are: – Charlie744 Jul 7 '20 at 4:00
  • Yes Charles, it's fair to give a couple keys rather than full blown explanation, for someone to begin to consider it first for herself, before hearing all the details. I see "salvation" in 11:33, 35-36, 45, I think. The thug's importance is that Jews resisted him and God preserved the nation for the incarnation of His Son (3:25). And also his (shared with other thugs) prefiguring/resemblance to the coming son of perdition, man of lawlessness, Antichrist, no (7:8, 20-21, 24-25; 8:9-12, 23-25; 9:27; 11:31-32, 36-39; 12:11)? Is AE part of the 3rd kingdom, not between 3rd and 4th (8:8)? – Walter S Jul 9 '20 at 0:42
  • Walter, thanks for this response as well! Two things I believe are critical in trying to interpret 11: – Charlie744 Jul 9 '20 at 23:37
0

The chapter break here is most unfortunate. Chapters ten through twelve should be read as a complete, unbroken discourse. There is no break in the conversation between the end of chapter ten and the end of chapter twelve. 11:1 belongs as part of 10:21which establishes the context.

I. Gabriel and Michael 1

10:21 Yet, no one has the courage to support me against these, except Michael your prince.

11:1 Yet there is no one who stands firmly with me against these forces except Michael your prince.” (NAS) And I (Gabriel), in the first year of Darius the Mede, stood up to strengthen and protect him. (Michael)

The antecedent of “him” is not Darius but Michael from 10:21. God moved Darius to return the Jews to their own land, and it is clear from chapter ten that opposition to the will of God in this matter came not from Darius, but from the demonic world via the “prince of the kingdom of Persia.” Gabriel alludes here to the fact the he had strengthened and assisted Michael in that other worldly struggle. It would have been a victory for Satan had the return of the Jews and the reconstruction of the temple, somehow been thwarted. Gabriel encourages Daniel by assuring him that nothing that has happened, or that was going to happen, would be by human design; nor would it be the result of random events; nor would it be thwarted by demonic forces, no matter how powerful they were. From the start, Gabriel and Michael were instrumental in carrying out the will of God among the nations of the earth for the benefit of God’s people.

II. The Persian Kings, 2

What Gabriel is going to do in chapters eleven and twelve is draw a picture for Daniel of the next 500 or so years of Syrian and Egyptian history as it will relate to the people of God. This will be an explanation of the “great conflict” he mentions in verse one. Chapters eleven and twelve were to serve as an explanation of all the previous visions Daniel had been shown. We know this is true because this is what Gabriel told Daniel he was going to do in 10:14,

I have come to explain to you what will happen to your people in the latter days (in later times), for the vision concerns those days.

What follows in chapters eleven and twelve is a detailed outline of political intrigue that would develop between the kingdom of the north – the Seleucid Empire, (and later the Roman empire) and the kingdom of the South – the Ptolemic Empire. This is a tale of drama and political intrigue that would rival anything Hollywood could possibly dream up.

The [designation of these kingdoms as north and south is because of] their geographic location in relation to the land of Judah. Remember that Daniel was a prince from Jerusalem, and [the] people of Israel [were] the center of [these] prophecy. So, the two powers historically would come from regions of the globe that [were] to the north and south of Jerusalem. It doesn’t necessarily mean from extremely southern or northern regions. The Ptolemaic dynasty ruled from Alexandria in Egypt, which is south of Israel, and the kings of the North (the Persian empire) ruled from Antioch in Syria, which is north of Israel, under the names Seleucus, and Antiochus.

Chapter eleven concerns the things that would transpire between those two nations for the next 200 years. Chapter twelve will deal with the fall of Persia, the rise of Alexander the Great, the division of the Alexandrian empire, and those things that would transpire between the Roman empire and the Ptolemaic empire for 300 years.

Verse two tells us that four more kings would arise in Persia after Cyrus.

Now then, I will tell you the truth: Three more kings will arise in Persia, and then a fourth, who will be far richer than all the others. By the power of his wealth, he will stir up everyone against the kingdom of Greece.

These four kings would be:

A. Cambyses who ruled from 529-522 BC, and conquered Egypt in 525 BC.

B. ‘Pseudo-Smerdis’ (Gaumata) who only ruled for 7 months in 522 BC. He murdered his brother in order to seized the throne.

C. Darius I who defeated Gaumata and assumed the rule of Persia and ruled from 521-485 BC. According to Ezra 6:1-14, it was under Darius I that Ezra rebuilt the Temple.

D. Xerxes (Ahasuerus) who ruled from 485-464 BC

  1. He was the husband of Esther, Ezra 4:6.

  2. In the time of Xerxes, Israel was threatened with extermination at the hands of Haman but was saved through the intervention of Esther.

  3. Xerxes is historically renowned not only for his massive armies, but also for his extraordinary wealth. He was, under no uncertain terms, the wealthiest king to ever rule Persia.

  4. Not only do the riches of Xerxes point him out as the last king of Persia, but also his conduct towards Greece may be correctly described as “stirring up” against himself “the kingdom of Greece.” He would do this to his own destruction. Verse two specifically prophecies of this war saying,

By the power of his wealth, he will stir up everyone against the kingdom of Greece.

Xerxes went to war against Greece and was defeated at Salamis in 480 BC.

III. The Grecian Empire and the Rise of Alexander the Great, 3-4

Then a mighty king shall arise, who shall rule with great dominion, and do according to his will. And when he has arisen, his kingdom shall be broken up and divided toward the four winds of heaven, but not among his posterity nor according to his dominion with which he ruled; for his kingdom shall be uprooted, even for others besides these.

A. After the death of this “mighty king,” his kingdom would be divided after him among four different kings. We know this did not apply to any Persian king because the Persian Empire was never divided. B. So, in the time of Xerxes, a “mighty king” would arise from the South. This king (Alexander the Great) would be stronger, more powerful, greater, and more expansive than all of his predecessors. Alexander would later use the war of Xerxes to justify his own attack against Persia when he set out to conquer the world. Greece is the Ram of chapter eight and Alexander is the horn that was broken.

  1. Despite his power, he would be broken and his kingdom “parceled out toward the four winds.”

  2. Verse four tells us that his kingdom would not be given to his descendants, “but not among his posterity.”

When Alexander the Great died, he was actually succeeded by his brother Philip Aridæus, and [also] by his own two sons; but in the space of about fifteen years they were all murdered, and the kingdom, was entirely broken. (Benson).

Thus, it was not divided “among his posterity.” After this, the empire was divided between four of Alexander’s generals. These were the four notable horns that came up in the place of the one in chapter 8. These are the four heads of the leopard in the chapter 7. These four rulers divided the empire “toward the four winds of heaven,” verse 8. In other words, in all four directions.

a. Lysimachus took Thrace and much of Asia Minor.

b. Cassander controlled Macedonia and Greece.

c. Ptolemy I ruled Egypt, Palestine, Cilicia, Petra, and Cyprus and founded the Ptolemaic Dynasty which lasted until the death of Cleopatra VII in 30 BC.

d. Seleucus I ruled the remainder of Asia and founded the great Seleucid Empire which also comprised Mesopotamia, Persia, and part of India. Verse 24 says that “four kingdoms shall arise out of that nation, but not with its power.” After the death of Alexander the Great, four kingdoms would arise out of that nation, but the goat would never again enjoy the power it had under Alexander.

IV. The Rise of Seleucus and the Seleucid Empire, 5 (The king of the north)

[Although the great Grecian] kingdom of Alexander was divided into four principal parts, only Egypt and Syria [would survive and they will be the focus of these prophesies]. Macedon had been conquered by Lysimachus, and annexed to Thrace. But Later, Lysimachus was conquered by Seleucus I, thus the kingdoms of Macedon and Thrace were annexed to Syria. [The reason Egypt and Syria are the focus of these prophecies is because Israel lay smack dab between them and would at times be in the possession of one and then the other]. Scripture typically interweaves only as much of foreign affairs into the biblical narrative that have some relation to the Jews; and it is in respect of their situation to Judea, that the kings of Egypt and Syria are called the kings of the north and the south. — Bishop Newton

The kingdom of the South would be ruled by the Ptolemies. In the intrigue after Alexander’s death, Seleucus would ultimately gain control over Syria and became king of the North and the dynasty of the Seleucid line would continue until 64 B.C. (Benson)

Verse five says,

The king of the South will grow strong, but one of his commanders will grow even stronger and will rule his own kingdom with great authority.

“One of his commanders,” mentioned in verse five, refers to Seleucus who had originally served as an infantry general under Alexander the Great. Antigonus was the general who expelled Seleucus from Babylon and took over Seleucus’ portion of the kingdom. Seleucus then fled to Egypt where Ptolemy I made him general of his army.

Seleucus later defeated Antigonus in 312 BC and was then given Syria, Palestine, and Babylon; thus, this “commander” of Egypt became a king. Seleucus and his successors eventually spread the kingdom from the north to the far-east making it a kingdom far greater in size than that of Egypt, thus, he “ruled his own kingdom with great authority.” Since the Seleucid king established his capital in Syria, he became known as the “King of the north,” verse 7

V. The Alliance Between Ptolemy II of Egypt and Antiochus II of Syria,

Verse 6 informs us that an alliance would be formed between Ptolemy II of Egypt and Antiochus II of Syria, but this would be an alliance doomed to failure.

And at the end of some years they shall join forces, for the daughter of the king of the South shall go to the king of the North to make an agreement; but she shall not retain the power of her authority, and neither he nor his authority shall stand; but she shall be given up, with those who brought her, and with him who begot her, and with him who strengthened her in those times.

Here is how all of this played out.

Ptolemy II of Egypt, and Antiochus I of Syria, warred against one another but the war ended in a deadlock. In 261 BC, Antiochus I died and was succeeded by his son Antiochus II, and Ptolemy II went to war against him as well.

In 252 BC, in an attempt to create peace between the two nations, Ptolemy II gave his daughter Berenice, (whom verse six calls, “the daughter of the King of the South”), in marriage to Antiochus II. Thus, she “came to the king of the north.” Her purpose was to “seal an agreement” of peace.

In order to accept Berenice as his new wife, and to please the King of Egypt, Antiochus II divorced his wife Laodice who had born him two sons – Seleucus II and Antiochus III. Berenice later persuaded Antiochus to bar the sons of Laodice from the succession to the throne in favor of her own son. When Ptolemy II died two years later in 252 BC, Antiochus then divorced Berenice and returned to Laodice thus, “the daughter of the King of the South” did not “retain the power of her authority,” just as verse 6 prophesied.

But... Laodice clearly had plans of her own that did not seem to include forgiving Antiochus. Six years later, in 246 BC, Laodice had Berenice, Antiochus II, and their infant son murdered and placed her own son (Seleucus II) on the throne. Thus, “neither he (Antiochus II) nor his authority shall stand.” Thus, all of Ptolemy's plans to make peace with Syria ended in disaster.

But she (Berenice) shall be given up with those who brought her, (Berenice’s onterroge from Egypt who supported her) and with him who begot her, (Ptolemy II) and with him who strengthened her in those times.

Some nobles who had supported Berenice as queen were also brought down. This resulted in a series of military actions known as the Laodicean War.

VI. In Verses 7-8, Gabriel Prophesies Continual War Between Egypt and Syria From That Time On.

But one from her (Berenice) family line will rise up in his place, (Ptolemy III) come against the army of the king of the North, and enter his (Seleucus II) fortress, fighting and prevailing. He will take even their gods captive to Egypt, with their metal images and their precious vessels of silver and gold. For some years he will stay away from the king of the North.

A. This is the rise of Ptolemy III – “one from her family line.”

According to Keil, “one from her family line” is more accurately understood as “a branch of her root;” In other words, not one of her own descendants, but a sibling. Her brother, Ptolemy III, son of Ptolemy II, succeeded Ptolemy II as king over Egypt from 246-222 BC.

Verse 7-8 says that Ptolemy III would

come against their army and enter the fortress of the king of the North, and he will deal with them and display great strength. Also, their gods with their metal images and their precious vessels of silver and gold he will take into captivity to Egypt, and he on his part will refrain from attacking the king of the North for some years.

Ptolemy III sought to avenge his sister’s death so, he attacked the king of the North and captured the Syrian capital of Antioch. Verse 8 describes the recapture by Ptolemy of “long-lost idols and sacred treasures” (Expositor’s, p. 131) that had been stolen from Egypt by Cambyses in 524 B.C. (Benson???)

During this battle, Ptolemy III killed Laodice thus avenging the murder of his sister Berenice and her son. Later, Ptolemy III returned to Egypt for a time of peace, which fulfilled verse eight which says, “For some years he will stay away from the king of the North.”

Seleucus II continued to reign over Syria even though he lost the battle against Ptolemy III. He did make an effort to invade Egypt in 240 BC but was defeated thus, peace was established until his death in 226 BC. This fulfilled verse nine which says,

Also, the king of the North shall come to the kingdom of the king of the South, but shall return to his own land.

B. Verses 10-13 describe the great conflict between Egypt and Syria.

But his sons (the sons of Seleucus II – Seleucus III and Antiochus III) will stir up strife and assemble a great army, which will advance forcefully, sweeping through like a flood, and will again carry the battle as far as his fortress. In a rage, the king of the South will march out to fight the king of the North, who will raise a large army, but it will be delivered into the hand of his enemy. When the army is carried off, the king of the South will be proud in heart and will cast down tens of thousands, but he will not triumph. For the king of the North will raise another army, larger than the first, and after some years he will advance with a great army and many supplies.

  1. Both Seleucus III and Antiochus III attacked the Ptolemaic empire after their father died. This would end the period of peace between the north and south. Now, Seleucus III only reigned for three years and his military activity was relatively minor. But at his death, his brother Antiochus III (Antiochus the Great), would continue the war against Egypt. In the process, he did “overwhelm and pass through,” taking Palestine away from Egypt. But if there was ever a king who was destined for failure, it would have to be Antiochus III.

  2. In a second attempt to defeat Ptolemy IV, Antiochus would “again carry the battle as far as his fortress.” (the boarder of Egypt)

  3. In response, verse 11 says, “In a rage, the king of the South (Ptolemy IV) will march out to fight the king of the North (Antiochus III) and defeat the larger army of Antiochus thus fulfilling verse 11, “but the multitude shall be given into the hand of his enemy.”

  4. Ptolemy IV would again defeat Antiochus III in 219 BC when Antiochus invaded Palestine a second time. After defeating Antiochus III, Ptolemy slaughtered tens of thousands of Jews in Egypt fulfilling verse 12 which says,

When the army is carried off, the king of the South will be proud in heart and will cast down tens of thousands, but he will not triumph.

  1. Antiochus III was a king who refused to give up, 13-19.

Verse 13 says that Antiochus would again amass a great army to go against Ptolemy IV.

For the king of the North will raise another army, larger than the first, and after some years, he will advance with a great army and many supplies. In those times many will rise up against the king of the South. Violent ones among your own people will exalt themselves in fulfillment of the vision, but they will fail.

Then the king of the North will come, build up a siege mound, and capture a fortified city. The forces of the South will not stand; even their best troops will not be able to resist. The invader will do as he pleases, and no one will stand against him. He will establish himself in the Beautiful Land, with destruction in his hand. He will resolve to come with the strength of his whole kingdom, and will reach an agreement with the king of the South. He will give him a daughter in marriage in order to overthrow the kingdom, but his plan will not succeed or help him.

Then he will turn his face to the coastlands and capture many of them. But a commander will put an end to his reproach and will turn it back upon him. After this, he will turn back toward the fortresses of his own land, but he will stumble and fall and be no more.

a. From 217-200 BC, Antiochus III again built up a massive army and waited for the right time to fight Egypt yet again.

b. When Ptolemy IV died in 203 BC, his son Ptolemy V, who was still only a child, assumed the throne. By now, Egypt had weakened considerably. Antiochus thought to take advantage of the weakened Egyptian empire and attacked soon after the death of Ptolemy IV and won the battle of Panion.

c. During this time, some of the Jews assisted Antiochus in fighting against the Egyptians. Verse 14 tells us that,

In those times, many will rise up against the king of the South. Violent ones among your own people (the Jews) will exalt themselves in fulfillment of the vision, but they will fail.

Their alliance with Antiochus eventually meant their own downfall and the rebellion was ultimately crushed by the Egyptian general Scopus, 12:1.

d. But Antiochus III later defeated Scopus and again took control of “the beautiful land,” Palestine, 11:15-16.

e. Antiochus then devised a plan to take over Egypt, not through warfare, which was extremely expensive, but through his daughter Cleopatra I, “He will give him a daughter in marriage in order to overthrow the kingdom,” 17.

• Antiochus III proposed peace to Egypt and sealed his apparent good intentions by giving his daughter in marriage to Ptolemy V in 198 BC.

• His hope was that his daughter would influence the young king (who was then only 12 years old when the marriage was consummated), so that Antiochus could then control Egypt.

• Verse 17 says, "but his plan will not succeed or help him." What Antiochus did not take into consideration was the possibility that his daughter would side with her husband rather than with her father Antiochus. But Cleopatra consistently sided with her husband against Antiochus thus, his plans to control Egypt failed again.

f. Antiochus then joined with Hannibal in an attempt to conquer Rome, 11:18.

Then he will turn his face to the coastlands and capture many of them. But a commander will put an end to his reproach and will turn it back upon him. After this, he will turn back toward the fortresses of his own land.

• The Roman general Scipio defeated Antiochus III in 190 BC and made him pay 15,000 talents of silver, (1,125,000 lbs of silver @ $262.79 per lb. = $295,638,750 on today's market). Scipio also took Antiochus’ war elephants, and his navy in payment for the defeat. • As part of his fine, his younger son Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) was taken as a hostage to Rome. (Butler, College Press)

g. Verse 19 tells of Antiochus III's last battle and his rather ignominious death.

Antiochus attempted to regain his losses to Rome by invading the Armenians in 187 BC but was defeated by the Elamites. According to Hans Volkmann, professor of Ancient History, University of Cologne, Antiochus as later was murdered in 187 BC in a Baal temple near Susa, where he was exacting tribute in order to obtain much needed revenue. As verse 19 says, “he will stumble and fall and be no more.”

  1. The role of Seleucus IV 187-175 BC

In his place (Antiochus III), one will arise (Seleucus IV) who will send out a tax collector for the glory of the kingdom; but within a few days he will be destroyed, though not in anger or in battle. 20

• Seleucus IV began his rule after his brother’s death, and like his brother, he imposed heavy taxes to regain some of the money lost to Rome. According to 2 Maccabees 7, the oppressor whom he sent to collect the money was Heliodorus.

• Seleucus IV would die suddenly and unexpectedly. Verse 20 says,

within a few days he will be shattered though neither in anger or in battle.

• The death of Seleucus IV then made room for one of the most despicable persecutors of God's people of all times – Antiochus IV Epiphanes. He will be presented in the remaining verses.

4
  • Just read the recent responses.. certainly a lot of good information but I do not find AE has any place in chapter 11. I believe 11 speaks about the prophetic events that take place within the 4th kingdom—- which is not post Alexander rulers. Those events will be the coming Messiah, the destruction of the Temple and the Jews, the transition from pagan Rome to the power taken by the little horn and then the spiritual battle between God and this little horn. Also, in response to one of the other comments recently mentioned, there is no 7 year period ( last week of Daniel’s 70 weeks). – Charlie744 Jul 6 '20 at 14:11
  • Well, all I can do is provide you with the information. What you choose to do with it is up to you. – oldhermit Jul 8 '20 at 20:23
  • Charles could you say that the battle between God and the little horn is mostly physical, not spiritual (Rv 16:10; 19:19-20)? And---no intention to battle you: in Dan 9:24-27 did you understand the 70 7-year periods to rather be periods of 7 days (literal weeks)? – Walter S Jul 9 '20 at 0:03
  • Walter, thanks for the comment! No, the battle between God and the little horn is spiritual. The battle is for man to choose to obey God or him, since the little horn has: changed His commands, corrupted His commands with his traditions, and has even declared himselve to be “god on earth”. This is the choice. As you know, there have been and will always be “real / physical “ deaths on the earth during this battle, but the real “death” of each comes at His 2nd coming. The 70 weeks of Daniel amounts to 490 years. Three separate periods carved out by God - each has events to occur in each. – Charlie744 Jul 9 '20 at 23:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.