The last person in Daniel 11. Who is it?

Question

31 “His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation. 32 With flattery he will corrupt those who have violated the covenant (Jews that became greeks), but the people who know their God will firmly resist him (Jews that stayed faithful to torah- the Maccabees etc).

That king is Antiochus 4 Epiphanes as Maccabees explains.

36 “The king will do as he pleases. He will exalt and magnify himself above every god (Antiochus name means God manifest) and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods. He will be successful until the time of wrath is completed, for what has been determined must take place. 37 He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors or for the one desired by women, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself above them all. 38 Instead of them, he will honor a god of fortresses; a god unknown to his ancestors he will honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and costly gifts. 39 He will attack the mightiest fortresses with the help of a foreign god and will greatly honor those who acknowledge him. He will make them rulers over many people and will distribute the land at a price.[d]

Antiochus put a statue of Zeus in the temple which was the God of his ancestors which is contradictory. He built a fortress called Acra. I will assume the above is still about Antiochus 4 Epiphanes. I don't know if he sold land. Crassus, and Julius Caesar sold land or made legal land reforms.

40 “At the time of the end the king of the South will engage him in battle, and the king of the North will storm out against him with chariots and cavalry and a great fleet of ships. He will invade many countries and sweep through them like a flood. 41 He will also invade the Beautiful Land. Many countries will fall, but Edom, Moab and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered from his hand. 42 He will extend his power over many countries; Egypt will not escape. 43 He will gain control of the treasures of gold and silver and all the riches of Egypt, with the Libyans and Cushites[e] in submission. 44 But reports from the east and the north will alarm him, and he will set out in a great rage to destroy and annihilate many. 45 He will pitch his royal tents between the seas at[f] the beautiful holy mountain. Yet he will come to his end, and no one will help him.

Does that really fit Antiochus? It appears to have not changed the person it is talking about unless it has changed to talking about the king of the north or south. Edom ceased to exist 70 AD (Josephus), Moab ceased to exist 63 BC with Pompey.. Pompey did invade Jerusalem 63 BC too. Does it fit Pompey? Does it fit Crassus or Julius Caesar? Crassus was rich, and sold a lot of land. Caesar made land reforms. Whoever it was it appears to have ended 164 BC with the death of antiochus or with the deaths of Julius 44bc Crassus 53 bc or Pompey 48 bc. edit: Crassus stole gold from the Jerusalem temple also.

Answer 1

I agree that the description from v36 onwards is not about Antiochus. I take it as speaking about a second and future ruler modelled upon Antiochus, similar but not identical.

Firstly, vv36-8 read like the beginning of a completely fresh character description. Antiochus has already been described in the narrative from v21 onwards.

Having said that, Jesus applies the "abomination" prediction of v31 to a situation in his own future (Matthew ch24 v15). If we wish to respect this interpretation from Jesus, it might be best to apply this and the intervening vv32-5 to both rulers, allowing the two descriptions to overlap at this point.

Secondly, the two rulers are similar but not identical in their attitude towards the gods. The second king respects NO inherited gods, whether those favoured by men or by women. Antiochus did not go that far. His hostility is towards the special traditions of the God of Jerusalem. Despite his conversion to Epicurean views, he was renowned, according to Livy, for the way that he honoured the temples of the traditional gods. For example, he adorned Delos with altars and statues, and established the temple of Jupiter Olympius at Athens.

Thirdly, the two rulers are similar but not identical in their militarism. The second ruler's new god is "the god of fortresses". And until the end of the chapter he prospers in his militarism. "The king shall do according to his will" (v36) indicates that he is successfully wilful. The militarism of Antiochus came to a shuddering halt when he encountered the Roman envoy Popilius backed by the Roman fleet (the "ships of Kittim" of v29). This was a humiliating experience, incorporating the original "circle in the sand".

Fourthly, the war described from v40 onwards has no match in the history of Antiochus.

Fifthly, the great resurrection and time of judgment announced in ch12 is presented as the climax of the war described from ch11 v40 onwards, which leads directly into it.

For these reasons, it seems to me that the second half of Daniel ch11 presents a picture of two kings, namely Antiochus Epiphanes and a future ruler who behaves in much the same way, one much closer to "the end". In the same way that I regard the Beast of Revelation as a combined picture of the Emperor Nero and a future ruler resembling Nero in many features.

Answer 2

I think it switches to Crassus from this point on 36 “The king will do as he pleases.

Crassus obtained a lot of land, and sold it. Was rich. Conquered fortresses

Dio Cassius said:[1]

After this success he (Marcus Licinius Crassus) did not leave in piece the rest of the Getae, either, even though they had no connexion with Dapyx, but he marched upon Genucla, the most strongly defended fortress of the kingdom of Zyraxes, because he heard that the standards which the Bastarnae had taken from Gaius Antonius (Hybrida) near the city of the Istrians were there. His assault was made both by land and from the Ister (the city is built upon the river), and in a short time, though with much toil, despite the absence of Zyraxes, he took the place. The king, it seems, as soon as he heard of the Romans' approach, had set off with money to the Scythians to seek an alliance, and had not returned in time.

In Antiquities book 14, chapter 7, Josephus tells how he this happened:

Now Crassus, as he was going upon his expedition against the Parthians, came into Judea; and carried off the money that was in the temple, which Pompey had left: being two thousand talents: and was disposed to spoil it of all the gold belonging to it, which was eight thousand talents. He also took a beam which was made of solid beaten gold, of the weight of three hundred minæ: each of which weighed two pounds and an half. It was the priest who was guardian of the sacred treasures, and whose name was Eleazar, that gave him this beam: not out of a wicked design: for he was a good and a righteous man: but being intrusted with the custody of the veils belonging to the temple, which were of admirable beauty, and of very costly workmanship, and hung down from this beam, when he saw that Crassus was busy in gathering money, and was in fear for the intire ornaments of the temple, he gave him this beam of gold, as a ransom for the whole: but this not till he had given his oath that he would remove nothing else out of the temple, but be satisfied with this only which he should give him, being worth many ten thousand [shekels.] Now this beam was contained in a wooden beam that was hollow: but was known to no others, but Eleazar alone knew it. Yet did Crassus take away this beam, upon the condition of touching nothing else that belonged to the temple; and then brake his oath, and carried away all the gold that was in the temple.

Answer 3

It is also possible from 36 onwards it is about Antiochus but not following on chronologically from before 36 but rather re telling the same events using different language so "41 He will also invade the Beautiful Land." is the same thing as "31 “His armed forces will rise up to desecrate the temple fortress and will abolish the daily sacrifice. Then they will set up the abomination that causes desolation." But he conquered Egypt before Jerusalem which would make this out of order

41 He will also invade the Beautiful Land. Many countries will fall, but Edom, Moab and the leaders of Ammon will be delivered from his hand. 42 He will extend his power over many countries; Egypt will not escape.