Grace Theological
Journal 4.2 (1983) 205-231.
[Copyright © 1983
Grace Theological Seminary; cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use at
Gordon and
AN INTERPRETATION OF
DANIEL 11:36-45
GEORGE M. HARTON
Dan 11:36-45 reveals the path to power of the Antichrist
at the
mid-point of the Tribulation period, when he initiates a new policy
of
aggression (
which attempt to stop him (
logical climax of persecution against
throughout the times of the Gentiles (12:1).
* *
*
RECENT
events in the
Christians
especially are challenged to correlate these events with
their understanding of biblical prophecy and to seize
upon opportuni-
ties to witness for Christ while conversing about
the
One
significant passage predicting events "at the end time" in
"the
11:36-45.
Who is this "King of the North" (
who "will do as he pleases" (
concerning prophetic matters could backfire if his
positions are based
on anything but careful exegesis of the pertinent
passages. Daniel 11
must be examined with special care in light of its
difficulty.2
This study will first examine the
context of this passage, then will
address four crucial questions which determine
the interpretive frame-
work, and finally will provide a condensed
commentary relating the
particulars of the passage to the framework
established.
CONTEXT OF
DAN 11:36-45
Context of the book
Daniel had been carried away captive
with other Hebrews into
pagan
l
Dan 11:40, 41, 45. All quotations are from the NASB unless otherwise
noted.
2 Daniel 11 is no doubt
the most difficult chapter of Daniel's prophecy." Donald
Campbell,
Daniel: Decoder of Dreams (Wheaton:
Victor, 1977) 32.
206
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Could
YHWH provide for their needs outside of the land of promise?
God's
purpose in giving this revelation through Daniel appears to
have been to reassure all that he was totally in
control of the affairs
of his chosen people
as well.
Dan 11:36-45 traces the efforts of
several Gentile kings to
establish themselves as world rulers.
middle of these conflicts as the pre-eminent
battleground, and all of
this leads to "a time of distress such as never
occurred since there was
a nation until that time" (12:1). Thus, this
section describes the
climax of the persecution at the hands of a Gentile
power like what
demonstration that God rules in spite
of appearances, and the second
half of the book was given in Hebrew to communicate
especially to
the nation of Israel God's plan and protection for
them.
Context of the Section
(10:1-12:13)
The message of God's rule over
Hebrew)
consists of the vision of the ram and the he-goat received by
Daniel
in the third year of the reign of Belshazzar (chap.
8), the
prayer of Daniel and the angelic revelation of the
seventy weeks in
the first year of Darius (chap. 9), and the vision
received in the third
year of Cyrus, king of
identification (10:1) helps to
indicate clearly that the final three
chapters comprise a single unit. The point of
this final vision is to
project, for
toward the consummation of history. The vision was
given to Daniel
toward the beginning of the
being under Gentile dominion did not stop with the
fall of
Instead,
the vision reveals that
Messiah. This section may be outlined as follows:
CONSUMMATION OF HISTORY
I. The Prologue 10:1-21
II. The Vision 11:1-12:3
A. Introduction (1)
B. Persian Rule (2)
C. Greek Rule (3-35)
1. Alexander
the Great (3-4)
2. Seleucids
and the Ptolemies (5-20)
3. Antiochus
Epiphanes (21-35)
HARTON:
INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 207
D. Roman Rule
(11:36-12:1a)
1. The Power
of the final Roman King (
2. The
Persecution of the Saints (12:la)
E. Messianic Rule (12:lb-3)
1. The
Rescue of
2. The
Resurrections (12:2)
3. The
Reward of the Righteous (12:3)
III. The Epilogue 12:4-13
Most agree that the chapter
division, which isolates 12:1-3 from
the rest of chap. 11 with which it structurally
belongs, is poorly
placed. The vision, running from 11:1 through 12:3,
forms the heart
of the section, and it reveals once more the same
progression of world
rulers as had been previously revealed in chap. 2 in
Nebuchadnezzar's
dream and in chap. 7 in the vision of the four beasts
followed by the
Son
of Man. Persia (11:2) and
The
consummative nature of resurrection and final judgment (12:2)
imply the arrival of the smiting stone. If Daniel is
to be consistent
with his previous revelation on the progression of
world rulers, one
would expect the
Empire and the Messianic reign.
The focus, in fact, in the section
is upon the climax of the "times
of the Gentiles." Such a large proportion of
material was devoted to
the career of Antiochus Epiphanes
(
nized to be a type of the
final "man of sin" and persecutor of the
Jews,
Antichrist. Then in v 36, the focus shifts from the type to the
antitype himself. Dan 11:36-45 reveals the power
of this "wilful king"
and 12:1a the climactic persecution that he
unleashes against God's
"people." But in this final hour, when the worst
pressure possible is
put upon
rules indeed! Thus, the final verses of Daniel 11
reveal the final
enemy of
Messiah.
Conclusion
Climactic power and persecution is
concentrated in Antichrist
and prepares the way for
rule.
CRUCIAL QUESTIONS ABOUT DAN 11:36-45
Many of the descriptive phrases in
this passage are general or
ambiguous enough to be adaptable to different
people at different
times. For example, Otto Zockler
adapts these phrases to a description
208
GRACE
THEOLOGICAL
of Antiochus Epiphanes.3 Thomas
Robinson, by contrast, applies the
phrases to a continuing description of the
Papacy of Rome.4
First,
the crucial questions that establish the framework of the
interpretation will be addressed
before a verse by verse analysis of the
entire passage will be attempted. The four crucial
questions that
establish the framework of Dan 11:36-45 are: (1)
What is the
temporal setting of the passage? (2) What is the
identity of the "wilful
king"? (3) What is the identity of the King of
the North? and (4) What
is the identity of the "attacker" in
The Temporal Setting of
11:36-45.
1. Proposal: The events described
here will take place during the
Great Tribulation. The temporal setting is
eschatological.
2. Proofs:
a. Dan 12:1 "Now at that
time." The end of chap. 11 is tied to
the eschatological events presented in 12:1-3 by
the chronological
description "at that time." Robert Culver
clearly sets forth the
determinative nature of this textual
identification:
There is small doubt in
the minds of any except a very few that the
first
portion of chapter 12 is prophecy concerning "last things"--in the
theological
nomenclature, "eschatology." Events connected with the
resurrection
of the dead and final rewards and punishments can hardly
be
otherwise.
If there were a clean
break in thought between chapters 11 and 12
it might be
possible to say that all of the previous section of the
prophecy
relates to events of now past history. But such a break does
not exist.
Rather, a chronological connection is clearly provided be-
tween the last of chapter 11 and the first of chapter
12 by the opening
words of
chapter 12. Referring to the destruction of a certain king
whose
career is predicted in the last part of chapter 11, chapter 12
opens thus:
"And at that time shall Michael stand up," etc. Thus a
clear
connection with the eschatological prediction of chapter 12 is
established
for the last portion, at least, of chapter 11.5
b. Dan 11:35, 36 "until the end
time." The transition to the
eschatological period is marked at v
35 when it is indicated that the
"people who know their God" (cf. v 32) will continue to
undergo
suffering and persecution "until the end
time; because it is still to
3 Otto Zockler, "The Book of the Prophet Daniel," in Lange s Commentary on the
Holy Scriptures, ed. John Peter Lange
(Reprint; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1960)
254ff.
4 Thomas Robinson, "Homiletical Commentary on the Book of Daniel," The
Preachers Homiletic
Commentary
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1974) 246ff.
5 Robert
D. Culver, Daniel and the Latter
Days (Chicago: Moody, 1954) 163.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL
11:36-45 209
come at the appointed time. "
V 36 then opens with the phrase, "Then
the king will do as he pleases." In other
words, v 35 appears to
summarize the continuation of the established
pattern of the suffering
of
in v 36 Daniel records the first revelation in
this vision concerning
this appointed end time. Gaebelein
summarizes this conclusion: "Be-
tween verse 35 and 36 we must
put a long, unreckoned period of
time.6
c.
Dan
Daniel
explained that he had come to give Daniel "An understanding
of what will happen to your people in the latter
days, for the vision
pertains to the days yet future" (
scope for the vision that may be expected to include
something of the
Messianic age and the final events of human
history.
But if 11:36-
12:3
is not viewed as being eschatological, then the angel
was misin-
formed, for nowhere else in the vision are the latter
days in view.7
3. Supporting Arguments:
a. The events of 11:36-45 do not fit Antiochus Epiphanes.
The
leading alternative to the view that the
temporal setting of this
passage is eschatological is that it is a
continued description of the
career of Antiochus Epiphanes
(cf. 11:21-35). The pagan historian
Porphyry
is usually cited in order to justify this proposal historically,
but E. J. Young, Robert Dick Wilson, H. C. Leupold, and John F.
Walvoord have all given scholarly and convincing
refutations of this
attempt.8
b.
There is a natural break in the text after 11:35. A number of
the versions recognize the break in subject by
making 11:36 begin a
new paragraph or section (e.g., NASB).
4. Conclusion:
There
is strong and clear chronological evidence in the text for
identifying the temporal setting of the events of
11:36-45 as the
eschatological time of Jacob's trouble
falling within Daniel's 70th
6 Arno
Gaebelein, Daniel
(Reprint; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1968) 179.
7 Some do place the shift to the
eschatological earlier than v 36. For example,
Jerome
identified the eschatological as beginning at 11:22, while G. H. Lang placed
its
beginning at 11:5. A consideration of such views
lies outside the scope of this study. All
that is being established now is that 11:36-45 is
eschatological and not historical.
8 E. J. Young, The
Prophecy of Daniel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949)
250-51;
Robert
Dick Wilson, Studies in the Book of
Daniel (Reprint; Grand Rapids: Baker,
1972)
266; H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Daniel (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1949) 510;
and John F. Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation
(Chicago: Moody,
1971) 271.
210
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
week. This conclusion will narrow the number of
potential candidates
for the role of the "wilful
king."
The Identity of the
"wilful king of 11:36
1.
Historical ruler or eschatological Antichrist?
If the argumentation regarding the temporal
setting as presented
above is accepted, then the answer to this question
is also solved.
However,
not everyone has seen it this way. Mauro identified this
king as Herod the Great, rabbinic interpreters such
as Ibn Ezra
identified him as Constantine the Great, Calvin saw
in this "king" the
Roman
Empire, and Antiochus has remained a favorite candidate
among liberal critics.9 The papal view as
cited before (Robinson) is
common among amillennial
interpreters, and at least one recent com-
mentator saw in Napoleon
Bonaparte the "wilful king" of Dan
11:36-39.10
Jerome and Luther are among earlier men who also
saw this
figure as the Antichrist of the last days.11
While other kings may
match some of the descriptive phrases in 11:36-39,
none but the
Antichrist
can measure up to the temporal qualifications of living "at
that time" in the "time of distress such
as never occurred since there
was a nation until that time" (12:1).
2.
"Beast of the sea" or the "false prophet?"
But complete agreement does not exist among
those who agree
that this wilful king is
eschatological. Most are comfortable using the
term "Antichrist," but are also
comfortable with applying that designa-
tion to anyone they choose.
For example, Herod, Constantine, the
Pope, and Napoleon have all been viewed as
"Antichrist." Once an
eschatological identification is
agreed upon, one must determine to
which eschatological figure this "wilful king" corresponds.
J. N. Darby and Arno Gaebelein identified this king with the
second beast of Revelation 13 (vv 11-17), or the
"false prophet."12
However,
I am in agreement with most premillennial
interpreters who
identify the wilful
king with the first beast of Revelation 13 (vv 1-10).
9 C. F. Keil,
"Biblical Commentary on the Book of Daniel," Commentaries on the
Old Testament (Reprint; Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1968) 461-62; and Young, The
Prophecy of Daniel, 246 for a listing of
these and other interpretations.
10 Roy Allan Anderson, "The Time of
the End," Signs of the Times
(November,
1970:
22, 23).
11 Jerome,
Commentary on Daniel, trans I. by Gleason L. Archer, Jr. (Grand
Rapids: Baker, 1958) 136.
12 Darby is cited by Walvoord,
Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation,
272; cf.
Gaebelein, Daniel,
180.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 211
The
function of the false prophet is to exalt the first beast, and the
wilful king is said to
"exalt and magnify himself" (11:36). The
identification with the "beast of
the sea" is preferable on the basis of
the wilful king's
preeminence and self-exaltation.
3.
Jew or Gentile?
Perhaps the majority of premillennial
interpreters have identified
this man as a Jew. Since this "prince"
(9:26) makes a covenant with
the Jews (9:27) in order to bring about a
substitute ("anti") peace,
and since the Jews would accept only a Jew as
"Messiah," it is felt
that Antichrist must be a Jew.13
However, an increasing number of commentators
are allowing
for a gentile Antichrist. Walvoord
points out that 11:37 does not use
the Jewish expression "Jehovah of his
fathers," but rather the non-
covenant name "Elohim,"
which was used by the Gentiles.14 To the
counter argument that Elohim
is an equally acceptable designation
for YHWH, Wood replies that since the singular lxe is used in this very
context (11:36) for the singular referent
"god," the plural yhelox< must
be translated "gods."15 This
would identify the wilful king as a
gentile.
The answer to this question may influence the
interpretation of a
few phrases in the passage (such as "he will
show no regard. . . for
the desire of women") but is otherwise not a
major matter. I am
inclined to agree with Walvoord
and Wood that the Antichrist will
probably be of gentile extraction. One need not
be a Jew in order to
sign a treaty with
"many," will probably involve many nations in addition
to
Perhaps
it is more likely that the nations of the world will sign a
peace treaty with a gentile than with a Jew.
Furthermore, since the
type of Antichrist, Antiochus, was not a Jew, the
antitype need not be
a Jew either.
4.
Conclusion:
The wilful king of Dan
11:36-45 may be identified as an eschato-
logical personage who will appear in the
Tribulation period. His
career and characteristics are elsewhere described in
Daniel 7 (the
"little horn"), in Daniel 9 ("prince that shall
come"), in 2 Thessalo-
nians 2 ("man of sin
"), and in Revelation 13 ("beast. . . of the sea").
With
these defining traits in view, he may be called the Antichrist.
13 Lehman Strauss, The Prophecies of Daniel (
1969) 343; J. Allen Blair, Living Courageously (
John C. Whitcomb, "The Book of
Daniel," The New Bible Dictionary,
ed. J. D.
14 Walvoord, Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation,
273.
15
212
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
The
identity of the King of the North in
1.
Problem of identifying the King of the North.
Dan
of
South;
most identify him as the king of
southern kingdoms in which
well with the entire pattern of Daniel 11, in which
the Ptolemies are
referred to with this same designation, The Ptolemies ruled from
identification is sealed by the
specific reference to
However, similar unanimity does not
exist with regard to iden-
tifying the King of the North.
The reason for this ambivalence may be
traced in part to the absence of any further specific
geographical
names as is true in the verses dealing with the King
of the South.
Nevertheless,
several guidelines do exist in seeking to determine an
identity for this king: his association with the
Seleucids through the
title "King of the North" as used
throughout Daniel 11 and his
activities as described in
2.
Proposals for identifying the King of the North.
Robinson and Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown (following
propose that
and Merrill Unger anticipate that
number, including Herman Hoyt, J. Dwight Pentecost,
Lehman
Strauss,
and Leon Wood, feel that this King of the North will
be
Russia.18
3.
Preferred identity of the King of the North.
a. Not
King
of the North do so in order to find a historical
fulfillment for
the King of the North. However, the eschatological
setting of the
passage forbids a historical fulfillment.
Inasmuch as the Seleucids
ruled over part of
expand in terms of geographical extent and
international power so as
16 Robinson, "Homiletical Commentary on the Book of Daniel," 256;
and Robert
Jamieson,
A. R. Fausset, David Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible (Reprint;
17 Ray E. Baughman, The Kingdom of God Visualized (Chicago:
Moody, 1972)
177, and Merrill Unger, Ungers Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody, 1966) 798.
18 Herman A. Hoyt, The End Times (Chicago: Moody, 1969) 152;
J. Dwight
Pentecost,
Things to Come (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1958) 344; Strauss; The
Prophecies of Daniel, 345; Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, 308.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION
OF DANIEL 11:36-45 213
to qualify as the eschatological King of the
North. This appears to be
very unlikely at the present time.
b. Not
association of
possible identification is found in the use of
the title "King of the
North,"
which is used earlier in Daniel 11 to refer to the Seleucid
branch of the Greek Empire. At that time
the
dominion of the Seleucids . . . reached from
he
Arrian
Anabasis 7:2.19
A
map of the Seleucid Empire shows its wide geographical range,20
and history has recorded the dominant international
influence exerted.
Consequently,
since the Seleucid Empire dominated a wide geographi-
cal area and was a world political power, the
single fact that
located north of
of the North.
of the King of the North inasmuch as it possesses
neither the wide
geographical range nor the world
power that characterized the Seleu-
cid kings. On this basis,
a wider geographical scope, and the royal capital
of the Seleucids,
the problem of political correspondence:
The designation "king of the
North" is not so easily adapted, for
the present Syrian government hardly qualifies as a
world contender of
the stature of the Seleucids.22
There is also an exegetical
problem--the activities of this king in
11:40.
"And the king of the North will storm against him [the wilful
king of 36-39] with chariots, with horsemen, and
with many ships;
and he will enter countries, overflow them, and
pass through." Then
v 41 continues the narrative with the statement:
"He will also enter
the Beautiful Land." If it can be demonstrated
(I will attempt to do
this in the next section) that the "he" of
v 41 does not represent a
change of antecedent, but is continuing the
description of the King of
19 Young, The Prophecy of Daniel, 234; cf. Charles
Pfeiffer, Howard Vos, The
Wycliffe Historical
Geography of Bible Lands (Chicago: Moody, 1967) 268.
20 See map xii of the
Seleucid Empire in Merrill C. Tenney, The Zondervan
Pictorial Encyclopedia
of the Bible
(Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976) vol. 5.
21 E. M. Blaiklock, "
5.331.
22 Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, 308.
214
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
the North's attack against Antichrist, then the
King of the North does
not enter
in
of the North's entering, overflowing, and passing
through other coun-
tries en route to
But even if this understanding of the
attacker in v 41 as the King
of the North is not accepted, Keil
does not believe that
the requirements of the activities described in
The plural tOcrAxEBa (into the countries) does not at all agree with
the
expedition
of a Syrian king against
this, that
the north, from which the angry king comes in his fury
against the
king of the south, reached far beyond
North is thought of as the ruler of
the distant north.23
Inasmuch
as
to see how the King of the North can enter
countries (plural) en route
to attacking the Antichrist in
require that the country of the King of the
North be geographically
removed from
boundaries of "the end time."
c. Probably
preters of this passage do
identify the King of the North as the
modem U.S.S.R. on the basis of a correlation with
Ezekiel 38-39.
However,
stronger supports for this view may be recognized in
the hermeneutical and exegetical requirements
discussed in connection
with
the title "King of the North" associated
with the Seleucid empire. It
has a corresponding northern location, a
corresponding vast geo-
graphical scope, and a corresponding world political
preeminence.
Consideration of
question and makes its association with the
Seleucid kings of the
north even stronger. For example, Barabas
states that "Magog was
probably located between
refers to the Scythians (Jos. Antiq.
I. vi. 1).24 In other words, before
the Scythians migrated further north they occupied
the area between
similar picture of
Encyclopedia of
Religious Knowledge:
23 Keil, "Biblical Commentary on the Book of
Daniel," 470.
24 S. Barabas,
"Gog and Magog," The
Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the
Bible 2.770.
25 Cf.
map xii, Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia
of the Bible, vol. 5.
HARTON:
INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 215
A stricter geographical location
would place Magog's dwelling between
people seem
to have extended farther north across the
here the
extreme northern horizon of the Hebrews (Ezek. xxxviii. 15,
xxix. 2). This is the way Meshech and Tubal are often
mentioned in
the
Assyrian inscriptions (Mushku and Tabal,
Gk. Moschoi and
Tibarenoi).26
Finally,
inasmuch as they would have to "enter
countries, overflow them, and
pass through" in order to attack Antichrist in
tion with the Seleucids and
the activities described in
the only objective basis for identifying this King
of the North, and
since
identification of the origin of this
king.
d. Prudence in identifying the King of the North. One should
not stress the name of a current country, because
the geographical
and political boundaries of countries are in a
state of flux. Wood
points out the proper posture:
Because the political situation in
the world could well be different when
the
Antichrist rules, however, it stands to reason that the terms should
be adapted
to whatever that difference may prove to be.27
While
the names and fortunes of individual countries may change, the
criteria for identifying the King of the North
will not change: his
country will be north of
least two borders, and his country will occupy a
large geographical
area and exert world power and influence.
The identity of the
attacker" in
Vv 41-45 trace the significant
activities of a king designated only
by the pronoun "he." Is the antecedent
of these pronouns the attacker
of v 40 (the King of the North) or the person
being attacked (the
wilful king)? Since it is not
revealed who wins the battle between
Antichrist
and the kings of the north and of the south, ambiguity
about the identity of the "he,"
"his," and "him" referred to throughout
vv 41-45 remains. Is this a continued attack of
the King of the North
that began in v 40b, or is this the counterattack by
the wilful king?
26 Vol.
5, p. 14 as cited by Pentecost, Things to
Come, 328. For similar arguments,
cf.
Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, 309.
27 Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, 308.
216 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
1.
Antichrist as the counterattacker in vv 41-45
a. Position. J. Dwight Pentecost
states this position as follows:
From this passage
several features concerning the movement of
this
invasion are to be seen. (1) The movement of the campaign begins
when the
King of the South moves against the Beast-False Prophet
coalition (
King of the South is joined by the
northern confederacy, who attacks
the Wilful King by a great force over land and sea (
destroyed
as a result of this attack (Zech. 12:2), and, in turn, the armies
of the
northern confederacy are destroyed (Ezek. 39; Zech. 12:4). (3) The
full armies
of the Beast move into
all that
territory (
It is evidently at the time that the
coalition of Revelation
formed. (4)
While he is extending his dominion into
that causes
alarm is brought to the Beast (
of the
approach of the Kings of the East (Rev. 16:12) who have assem-
bled
because of the destruction of the northern confederacy to challenge
the
authority of the beast. (5) The Beast moves his headquarters into
the
there that
his destruction will come (
In
this scenario, the initial aggression is seen to come from the King
of the South and then from the King of the North.
Then Antichrist is
seen to seize this opportunity to counterattack and
pursue his own
policy of military aggression as described in vv 41-45
until he meets
his end at Armaggedon. Vv
40 and 41 are usually taken as referring
to the middle of the Seventieth Week of Daniel 9,
involving the
breaking of the covenant, and vv 44 and 45 are
usually taken as
referring to the end of the Seventieth Week and
the battle of Ar-
maggedon. Thus, this passage is
viewed as summarizing a whole series
of military campaigns spanning the entire 42
months of the end of
Daniel's seventieth week.
Probably the majority of premillennial interpreters subscribe to
this view. It is especially prominent among
"popular" writers such as
Oliver
Greene, Charles Ryrie, and C. I. Scofield, and has
been
published in such magazines as Moody Monthly and
Good News
Broadcaster.29
28
Pentecost, Things to Come, 356.
29
Oliver Greene, Daniel (Greenville:
The Gospel Hour, 1954) 439; Charles C.
Ryrie,
ed., The Ryrie Study Bible (Chicago:
Moody, 1978) 1242; C.I. Scofield, ed.,
The New Scofield Reference Bible (New York: Oxford University, 1967) 917;
Alfred
Martin,
"Daniel: Key to Prophecy," Moody
Monthly (July-August, 1972) 64; and
Theodore
Epp, "Events in the End Time," Good News
Broadcaster (October 1969) 7-9;
"Four
Confederations of Nations," Good News Broadcaster (November 1969)
22-25.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION
OF DANIEL 11:36-45 217
b. Proofs. Usually this position is
assumed to be correct rather
than having to be proven to be correct. Two lines of
support do seem
to be used: a contextual argument and a
chronological argument.
The prominence of Antichrist in the
immediately preceding
context (
phetic literature, argues for
a continued emphasis upon Antichrist in
vv 41-45. Accordingly, the "he" of v 41
would refer back to the "him"
of v 40, which does refer to the wilful king of vv 36-39.
It appears that the single biggest
support for this position is the
mention of "rumors from the East and from
the North" (v 44) which
lead to Antichrist's return to
(v 45), where he comes to his end. The rumors from the east
are
associated with
this man is associated with Armaggedon,
which follows immediately.
Wood
explains it this way:
While in this section of
from the
east and north, which will give him cause for alarm. The nature
of the
rumors or whom they concern is not indicated. Some expositors
believe
they concern the invasion of a vast horde of 200,000,000
warriors
from the far east (Rev. 9:16) under the leadership of "kings of
the
east" (Rev. 16:12), who will have heard of the Antichrist's victory
over the
earlier north-south confederacy and will then wish to challenge
him for
world leadership.30
Because
Antichrist is defeated and thrown alive into the lake of fire at
this point (
of all of vv 41-45.
2.
The king of the North as the attacker in vv 40-45
a. Position. John C. Whitcomb states
the essence of this posi-
tion in the New Bible
Dictionary:
Verse 35b is regarded as providing
the transition to eschatological
times.
First the antichrist comes into view (xi. 36-39); and then the
final king
of the north, who, according to some premillennial
scholars,
will crush
temporarily both the antichrist and the king of the south
before
being destroyed supernaturally on the mountains of
40-45; cf Joel ii. 20; Ezek. xxxix.
4, 17). In the meantime, antichrist will
have
recovered from his fatal blow to begin his period of world
dominion
(Dn. xi. 44; cf. Rev. xiii. 3, xvii. 8).31
Vv
40-45, then, are descriptive of the respective defeats of the kings
of the south and of the north. The King of the
South is defeated by
30 Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, 313.
31 John C. Whitcomb,
"The Book of Daniel," 293;
218
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
the King of the North, and the King of the North is
then brought to
his end by an unnamed adversary (Antichrist?) in v
45. The result of
the elimination of Antichrist's most powerful
adversaries is to establish
firmly his absolute worldwide dominion shortly after
the middle of
the seventieth week. This in turn leads to his
abuse of his tremendous
powers, in part by persecuting the Jews (12:la)
throughout the rest of
the seventieth week.
William Foster, Thomas Robinson,
Paul Tan, John Whitcomb,
and J. Allen Blair are among those holding this
identification.32
b. Proofs. Grammatical, exegetical,
and several contextual argu-
ments may be used to support
this position.
William Foster argues that the
antecedent for the pronoun "he"
in v 41 is the King of the North in v 40 who
"will storm against him
with chariots. . .":
The nature of this
problem is not the same as that of the
ambiguous
pronoun which precedes it, since, in the former sense, the
person
referred to by the pronoun was regarded as the passive object of
the action,
whereas in the present instance the pronoun represents the
active
source of the action. Since it is the king of the north who is the
active
contender, the natural reading would probably indicate that he
also should
be the one represented as entering into the countries.33
Without
any textual indication to reverse the subject (King of the
North)
and the object (Antichrist) of the action in v 40, the "he"
which is the subject of v 41 most naturally refers
back to the subject
of v 40.
Furthermore, this identification of
the antecedent of "he" in
11:40b
as the King of the North is supported by the fact that the King
of the North is the nearest possible antecedent.
Most English transla-
tions are misleading at this
point because they invert the word order.
For
example, the NASB reads ". . . and the king of the North will
storm against him. . . and he will enter countries. .
." (
pronoun "him" (Antichrist) appears to
be the nearest possible ante-
cedent of the pronoun
"he" in the English translation. However, in
the Hebrew text, the object "against him"
(vylAfA) precedes the subject
"the King of the North" (NOpc.Aha
j`l,m,). This word order makes the King
of the North, and not Antichrist, the nearest
possible antecedent for
the pronoun "he." Without any textual
indication for doing so, it is
unwarranted to jump over the nearest antecedent, the
King of the
North. This identification is critical because this
initial pronoun is
32 William Foster,
"The Eschatological Significance of the Assyrian," Th.D. disser-
tation, Winona Lake, IN: Grace
Theological Seminary, 1956.
33 Ibid.,
152.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION
OF DANIEL 11:36-45 219
followed by an entire series of pronouns in
the same reference.
Foster goes on to argue that the
geographical progression in the
text between v 40 and v 43 also identifies the
attacking king of
45
as the King of the North:
. . . the
direction of his conquest is a positive proof that this
description
is of the King of the North--"he shall enter also into the
glorious
land. . . the land of
Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be
at his steps" (Dan.
the
prophecy of Daniel the phrase "the glorious land" is used three
times as a
designation for the land of the Jews into which an invader
proceeds
(Dan. 8:9;
comes from
the north, and in each case one who comes from the
ing first into
indicate
that the invading army proceeded from the north.34
While not all who hold this view
feel that this proof is as conclusive
as Foster makes it sound, the movement against
Antichrist begun
from the north (v 40) may be seen to flow most
naturally into
(v 41) and then on south past
(v 42) and finally into
way to visualize the geographical progression, it
is the smoothest and
most unified movement. It is reasonable to expect
that vv 41-45 do
continue the movement begun in v 40 unless there
is some textual
clue to indicate another movement.
Three contextual arguments also
support this conclusion. First,
throughout Daniel 11 the King of the South and the
King of the
North
are depicted as natural enemies who are continually warring
against one another. This identification fits
the pattern and also
provides a fitting climax to this struggle in the
end time.
Second, the phrase "Now at that
time" of 12:1 immediately
follows the conclusion of this section in
on to say that at that time "there will be a
time of distress such as
never occurred since there was a nation until that
time," the very
middle of the seventieth week is in view. If the time
of Jacob's trouble
is just about to begin at the time of the demise
of the king in
then this king cannot be Antichrist, but must be the
King of the
North. This temporal designation at 12:1 dare not be
treated too
loosely, for it is the cornerstone in the
argument in favor of an
eschatological interpretation of this
passage.
34 Ibid.,
152-53.
220
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
Third, this identification is in keeping with
the whole argument
and development of the Book of Daniel and of the
last half of the
book in particular. Daniel is demonstrating that God
is still the ruler
over all in spite of
end, but when they do reach their climax at the
hand of the wilful
king, Antichrist himself, during the time of Jacob's
trouble, then
Messiah
will rescue
indeed Antichrist, rather than the King of the North
who is destroyed
in
porally. Preserving the
argument and development of this section
involves identifying the attacker in vv 40-45 as
the King of the North.
3.
Conclusion: the King of the North is the attacker in vv 40-45
That I prefer this explanation is evident by
now. Not only does
this position rest on good, solid exegesis of the
text, but it also avoids
the weaknesses in the alternate view. Following is
a brief consideration
of three of these weaknesses.
a. 11:40. There is a complete lack of exegetical
indicators for
switching from the kings of the south and north to
Antichrist as the
attacker in v 41. George N. H. Peters, who held
the Antichrist view
himself, admitted this weakness:
"And he shall enter
into the countries"--this is perhaps the clause
which has caused the greatest
difficulty to critics, owing to the sudden
transition from one person to
another. If we were to confine ourselves
to this prophecy, it would
be impossible from the language to decide
what king this was that is
to enter into the countries; whether the King
of the North, or of the
South, or of the
Peters
then goes on to justify an abrupt shift in
Antichrist
on the basis of other passages, such as Daniel 2 and 7 and
Revelation 17. He openly admits that
there is nothing in the language
of the text itself to justify this sudden
transition from the description
of the activity of the King of the North in the
phrase immediately
preceding "he shall enter into the
countries."
b. 11:41.
Those favoring the Antichrist view picture the kings
of the south and of the north as coming against
Antichrist
is seen responding to this aggression in
the "beautiful land" for the first time
himself and instituting a
counter-attack of his own. There is a
serious problem with this
interpretation, however, for the text
does not say that the kings of the
south and north attacked
two kings attacked him (Antichrist;
35 George Peters, The Theocratic Kingdom (Reprint; Grand Rapids: Kregel,
1952)
2.654.
The italics are those of Peters.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 221
cannot subsequently enter the scene at the end of v 40
or at v 41. The
attack against him puts him in the middle of the
action right from the
beginning of v 40. This fact is also pointed out
by Ray Baughman:
".
. . the king of the north (and the king of the south)
comes against
the Antichrist, not against
c. 11:44, 45. A third weakness is the
association of the "rumors
from the East and from the North" with the
kings of the east of
Revelation 9 and 16. Almost all commentators
will admit that the
King
of the North hears these rumors while conducting his Libyan
and Ethiopian campaigns to the south and west of
the "Beautiful
Land" that he had passed through on his way
down to
records his trip back to the east and the north
to the "beautiful Holy
Mountain"
(
emanated from or concerned something going on in
is no textual basis whatsoever for seeing kings of
the east here. Not a
word is mentioned about kings of the east. And this
conjecture is
made on the basis of identifying this king as
Antichrist and of
changing the temporal setting from the middle of
the seventieth week
to the end of the week at Armaggedon.
That it would require
Antichrist
42 months to subdue this coalition of southern kings is
hard to reconcile with Rev 13:4: "Who is like
the beast, and who is
able to wage war with him?"
Summary
It has been stated that the interpretation of
Dan
upon one's answers to four crucial questions. Each
of these questions,
therefore, has been considered in depth. The
temporal setting of the
text was found to be an eschatological one,
specifically that of the
middle of the seventieth week of Dan 9:27. The wilful king was found
to be the Antichrist of the Tribulation period,
the beast of Reve-
lation 13. Most premillennial interpreters would agree with these
identifications.
However, premillennialists
are divided on the answers to the last
two crucial questions. It was determined that
modern
most likely identification of the place of origin of
the King of the
North
in this passage, and that it is this same King of the North (and
not Antichrist) whose final exploits are traced in
vv 41-45, ending in
his demise. Thus, in vv 40-45 both the King of the
South and the
King
of the North are defeated, leaving Antichrist as sole
world ruler
at the middle of the seventieth week.
This establishes the basic framework of this
interpretation. It
now remains only to do a brief phrase-by-phrase
commentary on the
entire passage to determine how the details fit into
this framework.
36 Baughman, The Kingdom of God Visualized, 179.
222
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
CONDENSED COMMENTARY
"Roman Rule:
(Daniel
Having retraced prophetically the Persian rule
(11:2) and the
Greek
rule (11:3-35), the angel revealed that the climax of
suffering under Gentile dominion would be the
final Roman ruler
(
is the final stage of the fourth kingdom that will
be crushed by the
stone cut without hands (cf.
tion about the fourth beast
and the little horn (7:7, 8) that will
immediately precede the Son of Man's establishment
of his everlasting
dominion (7:9-14).
I.
The Power of the Roman King. 11:36-45
A. Arrogance and Aggression of the Roman King
(36-39)
(Power Asserted)
1. Arrogance of the
Roman King (36-38)
2. Aggression of the
Roman King (39)
B. Attackers of the Roman King Defeated (40-45)
(Power Attested)
1. The Roman King
Attacked (40)
2. The King of the South
Defeated (41-43)
3. The King of the North
Defeated (44-45)
II.
The Persecution of the Saints by the Roman King. 12:la
(Power Abused)
Power of the final Roman
King:
Vv 36-39 record the assertion of the Roman
king's power
through his arrogance (vv 36-38) and his acts of
aggression (v 39).
This
power is then attested (vv 40-45) when the Roman king is
attacked (v 40) by world powers from the south
and from the north.
First
the southern coalition is defeated (vv 41-43) and then the
northern armies are defeated (vv 44-45), leaving
the Roman king
with absolute, worldwide, unchallenged power.
1.
Arrogance and aggression of the Roman king (vv 36-39)
a. Arrogance
of the Roman king (vv 36-38)
"Then
the king will do as he pleases." This introduces a ruler
who has absolute authority and can act in an
arbitrary manner
without having to answer to anyone.
"And
he will exalt and magnify himself above every god." This
absolute ruler will be arrogant and given to
self-exaltation. Paul, in
HARTON: INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 223
2
Thess 2:4 quotes this phrase ("who opposes and
exalts himself
above every so-called god or object or worship")
thus identifying this
Roman
king with the "man of lawlessness, the son of destruction" in
2 Thessalonians 2. Likewise, the Roman
king is associated with the
little horn of Dan 7:8 who also is characterized by
self-exaltation:
"and behold, this horn possessed. . . a mouth uttering great
boasts."
And will
speak monstrous things against the God of gods."
This
Roman king will blaspheme the living God. This is the first hint
that the Roman king has now broken the covenant with
will speak out against the Most High" (Dan
his mouth in blasphemies against God, to blaspheme
His name and
His tabernacle" (Rev 13:6).
And he
will prosper until the indignation is finished. Such
terrible blasphemy does not mean that God has
lost control. To the
contrary, God foreordained such persecutions
against
purpose of chastening his chosen people and for
preparing them for
repentance. The concept of indignation runs through
the entire book.
For
example,
pertains to the appointed time of the end."
Dan
description of the little horn's blasphemy with an
account of his
persecution of the Jews for the final 3 1/2 years of
the Tribulation
period: "And he will speak out against the Most
High and wear down
the saints of the Highest One, and he will intend
to make alterations
in times and in law; and they will be given into
his hand for a time,
times, and half a time."
For that which is decreed will be done. Dan
this awful description of arrogant blasphemy with a
reminder that
God
is in control. Dan
determined" and
This
is the main point of the entire Book of Daniel. "God is
supremely in charge of history, even when the
Antichrist rules.37
And he will show no regard for the gods of his
fathers or for the
desire of women." This Roman king will not
blaspheme YHWH out
of allegiance to a rival religious deity; this
monarch will be an atheist
who also rejects his own religious heritage. The
phrase "desire of
women" is ambiguous, and this ambiguity has
opened the door to
many fanciful interpretations.38 The only
textual control is that the
37 Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, 306.
38 Cf. Keil,
"Biblical Commentary on the Book of Daniel," 464; Leupold,
Exposi-
tion of Daniel, 516; George Williams, The Students Commentary on the Holy
Scriptures (Reprint; Grand Rapids:
Kregel, 1960) 629; Young, The Prophecy of Daniel,
249, for various proposals of pagan goddesses. See M. R. DeHaan, Daniel The
224
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
phrase occurs in a context of Antichrist's religion
and his rejection of
his religious heritage. There is good reason to
believe that this
religion is probably non-Jewish (see p. 211).
"Nor will he show regard for any other god;
for he will magnify
himself above them all." This description
continues to be consistent
with the fulfillment of the "Abomination of
Desolations" in which
Antichrist
causes the sacrifices to cease (cf. Dan
demands worship of himself. Antichrist
"exalts himself above every
so-called god or object of worship, so that he
takes his seat in the
"But instead he will honor a god of
fortresses, a god whom his
fathers did not know; he will honor him with
gold, silver, costly
stones, and treasures." In one sense, no one is a
complete atheist;
everyone "worships" something. The
Roman king's value system will
center in power and force and in materialism (gold,
silver, etc.). Might
will make right for this man. Strauss makes an
interesting association
of this description of Antichrist's
"religion" with that of the first beast
in Revelation 13:
It is possible that the
god mentioned here is the image of Antichrist,
the first beast in
Revelation 13, whose design and construction were
ordered by the second beast
(Revelation
this, then that image will
be made from gold, silver, and precious
stones, as mentioned in Daniel
11:38.39
Summary: Everything in vv 36-38 points to the
arrogance of this
self-centered Roman king who is
answerable to no man or to no god
but himself. The ultimate expression of this
arrogance may well be his
breaking of the covenant with
while demanding worship of himself. Such an act would
provide an
appropriate background for the aggressive acts
recorded in
b. Aggression of the Roman king (v 39)
And he will take action against the strongest
of fortresses with
the help of a foreign god." Antichrist now
puts his faith in power
and might into practice by attacking "the
strongest of fortresses."
Such
military aggression seems out of place during the first half of
the seventieth week when the covenant of peace is
in force. Con-
sequently, the mid-point of the
week has just been passed and the
abomination of desolation has just taken place.
Prophet (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1947) 299; Gaebelein, Daniel, 188; Strauss, The
Prophecies of Daniel, 343; Walvoord, Daniel: The
Key to Prophetic Revelation, 274,
for arguments in favor of seeing this as a
reference to a Messianic hope.
39Strauss; The Prophecies of Daniel, 344.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 225
"He will give great honor to those who
acknowledge him, and he
will cause them to rule over the many. This also
could indicate that
the covenant has been broken. Under the covenant,
this Roman king
enjoyed significant peace-keeping powers.40
However, he did riot
enjoy corresponding absolute power. At the mid-point
of the seven-
tieth week, Antichrist
chooses to pursue personal power. This imme-
diately causes factions and
choosing of sides. Antichrist will devise a
reward system to delegate some of his ruling authority
to those who
choose to follow him.
"And will parcel out land for a price.
Once more Antichrist is
viewed as having engaged in territorial expansion. In
his attack upon
"the strongest of fortresses," he appears to have been
successful so
that he is now in a position to parcel out this
newly acquired land.
Exactly
what land is in view is ambiguous, but it is intriguing to
consider that this land may be in
in
the kings of the south and of the north attack him
while he is in the
"beautiful land" (
aggressive expansionist and not a global
peacemaker.
c. Summary.
The picture of world conditions under
Antichrist's rule at the
close of vv 36-39 is hardly one of tranquility and
peace. Fortresses
are being attacked, puppets are being installed as
rulers, and land is
being redistributed. The world is witnessing military
aggression insti-
tuted by the one who was to
have been the peacemaker to end all
peacemakers. That Antichrist entered upon this
campaign of raw
aggression presupposes his having broken his
covenant with
and the nations.
This aggression provokes an attack against the
Roman king by
two of the world power blocks headed by the King of
the South and
the King of the North (
powers (
Roman king.
2.
Attackers of the final Roman king defeated (vv 40-45)
a. Attack upon the final Roman king (v 40).
"And at the end time the king of the South
will collide with
him. When Antichrist
manifests his true character in the middle of
40 Thus, the Roman king has already
overcome his western opposition (cf. Dan
the many" (Dan
nations of the world, including
226
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
the seventieth week, a coalition of southern (Arab)
nations move to
block his new policy of aggression.
And the
king of the North will storm against him with chariots,
with horsemen, and with many ships." Simultaneous
with, or just
subsequent--to, the attack by the King of the South
comes a second
attack upon the Roman king from the north. This
distinguishes three
kings: the King of the North, the King of the South,
and the "him"
(Om.fi; VylAfA), the Roman king. This prevents
identifying the King of the
North
as the same person as the Roman king.41 The
"him" also does
not permit the interpretation that this attack is
against
against the Roman king and his forces. Since the
Roman king is
consistently characterized as
warring against the saints (cf. Rev 13:7;
Dan
7:24-25; Dan 12:1), it is incomprehensible that the Jews should
now be allied with him. However, it is possible
that the attack upon
the Roman king takes place within the confines of
variety of the resources that are to be employed
against the Antichrist
indicate how great his power must be at the
latter end--'chariots,
horsemen, and many ships.'42
And he
will enter countries, overflow them, and pass through."
If
the Roman king is situated in
will come from some distance and sweep through
several other
countries en route to the major attack. The normal
sense of the
language is to see this as a continued
description of the activities of
the King of the North. There is no textual evidence
of a change in
subject.
b. Defeat of the King of the South (vv 41-43).
He will
also enter the Beautiful Land." The movement of the
King
of the North now carries him as far south as Palestine, which is
the orientation point of "north" and
"south" in the first place. Once
more there is a lack of any textual evidence for
changing the subject
of this action from the King of the North. The 3 m.s. pronoun cannot
even be considered ambiguous in the context. The
only ambiguous
element is the location of the Roman king. Is he
located in the land of
Palestine,
or is he located in one of the countries entered into and
overflowed by the King of the North in 11:40? Or is
he located in one
of the other countries mentioned in this verse?
And many countries will fall." Wherever
Antichrist may be, it
is implied that he is among the fallen as a result
of this attack.
41 Some do hold that the King of the North
and the wilful king are the same here.
See
for example, Culver, Daniel and the
Latter Days, 164. Since very few commentators
hold this position, little effort is made here to
refute it. See Foster, "The Eschatological
Significance of the Assyrian," 135-37, for
arguments that three persons are involved.
42 Leupold, Exposition of Daniel, 521.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 227
Whitcomb
proposes that this temporary defeat of Antichrist at the
hand of these two opposing kings may shed some light
on the "deadly
wound" of the Roman king emphasized in the Book
of Revelation
(cf.
13:3, 12, 14; 17:8, 11).43 As Antichrist simply drops out of sight
(and is left for dead?), the King of the North seizes this
opportunity
to further his own ambitions for world power. His
main enemy
having been eliminated, the King of the North now
attacks his rivals,
including former allies.
"But
these will be rescued out of his hand: Edom, Moab, and the
foremost of the sons of Ammon." On his way south
in attacking the
King
of the South, the King of the North evidently bypasses the area
of Edom, Moab, and Ammon
to the east of the Jordan (occupied by
modern-day Jordan). While there may be some
additional prophetic
significance to the bypassing of
these nations at this time,44 the
most simple explanation for "why countries to
the southeast of
Palestine
will escape destruction is that the path taken. . .
will lead
southwest.45
"Then he will stretch out his hand against
other countries and
the land of Egypt will not escape." Now the
primary target of this
march to the south is revealed. The King of the North
has turned
against his former ally, the King of the South,
who is now a chief
rival for world leadership. This battle has truly
become a "world war"
because of the repeated summary mention of
"countries" being in-
volved (vv 40,41,42).
Furthermore, the most probable identity of the
King
of the South is herein revealed to be the sovereign of Egypt.
But he
will gain control over the hidden treasures of gold and
silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt; and Libyans and
Ethiopians will follow
at his heels."
Egypt evidently will have been
amassing gold and silver in exchange for her
natural resources, and
these precious things are stripped from her as part
of the booty.
Having
conquered Egypt, the King of the North then appears to
divide his forces. One part of his army campaigns in
Libya to the west
of Egypt, and another part of the army campaigns
in Ethiopia to the
southeast. The King of the North has defeated the
King of the South
and is engaged in follow-through campaigns to
establish himself
firmly as ruler of the world. His dreams appear to be
within reach of
realization when something totally unexpected
happens.
c. Defeat of the King of the North (vv 44-45).
But
rumors from the East and from the North will disturb him,
and he will go forth with great wrath to destroy and annihilate
43 Cf. Whitcomb, "The
Book of Daniel," 293.
44 Strauss, The Prophecies of Daniel, 346.
45 Wood, A Commentary on Daniel, 312.
228
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
many. In light of the
sudden return of the King of the North to
Palestine
(11:45), these rumors from the east and from the north must
have emanated from, or have concerned, Palestine.
The frame of
reference for "east" and
"north" is no longer Palestine, but the actual
location of the King of the North in Libya and
Ethiopia. Palestine is
"east" of Libya and "north" of Ethiopia. Or if
one wishes to de-
emphasize these split campaigns and view the
entire operation as one
united campaign against Egypt and her allies,
Palestine is northeast
of Egypt.
Perhaps 11:44-45 is intended to reveal nothing
more than the
change in direction of the King of the North back to
the northeast,
back to Palestine. It is interesting, however, to try
to integrate
prophetic truth. The similarity of "rumors
from the east" to "the
kings of the east" of Revelation 9 and 16 has
led many commentators
to associate them. For at least two reasons these
passages probably
are not describing the same events. First, the
geographical reference
point differs. In Revelation, east is reckoned from
Palestine, whereas
east and north in Dan 11:44 is reckoned from Africa.
Second, the
temporal reference points differ. Revelation 16
clearly takes place at
the end of the seventieth week as it climaxes at
the battle of
Armaggedon, whereas Dan 12:1 clearly fixes the time
of 11:44, 45 as
the middle of the seventieth week and the start of
Jacob's trouble.
More likely is the correspondence between Dan 11 :44-45 and the
Roman
king's deadly wound as recorded in Revelation 13. The
Roman
king is here described as a beast out of the sea (13:1), but his
correspondence with the tenfold
symbolism of the Roman empire in
Daniel
2 and 7 is striking. V 3 cites a primary cause of the Roman
king's following:
And I saw one of his
heads as if it had been slain, and his fatal
wound was healed. And the
whole earth was amazed and followed
after the beast.
Newell
observes, "here then is Satan's permitted imitation of the
death and resurrection of Christ!46 This
imitation may either be a
deceptive appearance of death and resurrection, or
it may be an
actual death and miraculous resuscitation from the
dead. Pentecost
argues that the resurrection of Christ is unique and
that the Roman
king could not have really risen from the dead.47
Certainly, Antichrist
will be unable to reproduce Christ's unique
resurrection in a glorified
body, but he may be able to be resuscitated to life
following his
mortal wound. Whether he was merely left for dead and
then
46 William R. Newell, The Book of Revelation (Chicago: Moody, 1935) 186
47 Pentecost, Things to Come, 335-36.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 229
"miraculously" recovered, or actually died and was
restored to mortal
life by supernatural power, the false prophet will
use this event as a
sign and proof of Antichrist's right to be
worshipped:
And I saw another beast
coming up out of the earth; and he had
two horns like a lamb, and
he spoke as a dragon. And he exercises all
the authority of the first
beast in his presence. And he makes the earth
and those that dwell in it to worship the first beast, whose fatal
wound
was healed (Rev. 13:11-12; italics
added).
Some try to explain this fatal wound as an
experience of a nation
and not of a man, but the false prophet's message
appears to relate
only to a person and not to a national entity.
Newell agrees: "It is a
man that is before our eyes in Revelation 13, all
through. God says he
is a Man in 13:18.48 Furthermore, Rev
13:14 implies that this fatal
wound will be received in battle:
And he deceives those
who dwell on the earth because of the signs
which it was given him to
perform in the presence of the beast, telling
those who dwell on the earth
to make an image to the beast who had
the wound of the sword and
has come to life.
Here
it is revealed that the Roman king receives his wound from a
sword (i.e., during war).
This explanation of the relationship of Dan
11:36-45 to Revela-
tion 13 appears to have real
merit. Both involve a military context.
Both
have the same temporal setting, the middle of the seventieth
week, and both events serve to launch the worldwide
career of
Antichrist. No wonder the world is thereafter awed
by the beast,
asking, "who is able to wage war with him?"
(Rev 13:4). This
correspondence helps to visualize the
possible content of rumors that
would be powerful enough to cause the King of the
North to drop his
African
ventures and return immediately to Palestine. It would also
provide for the Roman king's continuing into Dan
12:1 and leading
the way during the tremendous persecution of the
Jews during the
second half of the seventieth week.
And he
will pitch the tents of his royal pavilion between the seas
and the beautiful Holy Mountain." This verse
clearly indicates the
King of the North's return northeast to
Palestine.
He bivouacs
between the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea
in the vicinity of
Jerusalem
("Holy Mountain").
Yet he
will come to his end, and no one will help him." Little
is said here apart from the revelation of the King
of the North's
demise. In view of the Antichrist's subsequent
prominence in the
48 Newell, The
Book of Revelation, 187.
230
GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
second half of the Tribulation period, one might
assume that the
northern king is either destroyed by Antichrist
or that Antichrist will
take credit for his defeat. This defeat of the King
of the North
following that of the King of the South serves to
prove the Roman
king's power and to leave him in absolute control of
the world.
d. Summary.
Paul Tan captures the essence of this
attestation of Antichrist's
power: "The beast is first defeated (Rev. 13:3),
but the northern
confederacy is supernaturally annihilated (Dan.
11:45), and the beast
becomes the world ruler (Rev. 13:7).49
Walvoord also sees the defeat
of the northern confederacy as a significant link
in Antichrist's path
to world rule:
With the northern kingdom destroyed there is no
major political force
standing in the way of the Roman
Empire, and the world empire is
achieved by proclamation. The
apparent invincibility of the Roman
ruler, supported as he is by
Satanic power, is intimated in the question
of Revelation 13:4,
"Who is like unto the beast? Who is able to make
war with him?"50
Persecution
of the saints: 12:1 a
Now at
that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard
over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a
time of
distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that
time. At that time, the
time of the demise of the King of the North,
the worst persecution of all time against the Jews
will break out. It
will be the time of Jacob's trouble (Jer 30:7) and two-thirds of the
Jews
will perish (Zech 13:8-9). The Lord Jesus warned that when
they saw the abomination of desolations spoken of by
Daniel, they
should flee from Judea to the mountains (Matt 24:15,
16), "for then
there will be a great tribulation, such as has not
occurred since the
beginning of the world until now, nor ever
shall" (Matt 24:21).
It
must be granted that 12:1 does not say that the Roman king
takes the lead in this climactic persecution of
Israel. But Scripture
does say this explicitly elsewhere. Revelation fills
in some of the
details not provided by Daniel at this point:
And there was given to him a mouth speaking
arrogant words and
blasphemies; and authority to act
for forty-two months was given to
him. And he opened his
mouth in blasphemies against God, to blas-
pheme His name and His
tabernacle, that is, those who dwell in
49 Paul Lee Tan, The Interpretation of Prophecy (Winona Lake: BMH, 1974) 347.
50 John F. Walvoord,
The Nations in Prophecy (Grand Rapids: Zondervan,
1967) 94.
HARTON: INTERPRETATION OF DANIEL 11:36-45 231
heaven. And it was given to
him to make war with the saints and to
overcome them; and authority
over every tribe and people and tongue
and nation was given to him
(Rev. 13:5-7; italics added).
In
light of later revelation, one can now say that this final persecution
begins at the mid-point of the seventieth week, and
thus the events of
11:36-45
also must be viewed as taking place "at that time."
Thus, the stage is set for the arrival of
Messiah to put down the
pagan Gentile powers and to establish his kingdom.
While 12:1b-3
does not say that this is the work of Messiah, later
revelation also
makes it plain that it will be Christ who rescues
Israel (12:1), who will
resurrect the dead (12:2), and who will reward the
righteous (12:3).
Consequently,
this brings the argument of the book to a climax. The
Gentile
nations dominating Israel, beginning with Babylon, would
not soon end. Persia, Greece, and Roman would
follow. But at the
appointed time in history's darkest hour, Messiah
will come and reign
forever. God rules.
CONCLUSION
This study has not been concerned with proving
every detail of
interpretation concerning Dan
11:36-45. A number of the phrases are
sufficiently ambiguous to allow
various "possible" interpretations.
The
core of the study has been examining and seeking to answer four
crucial questions.
What is the temporal setting of this passage? It
is eschatological,
and more specifically, the mid-point of the
seventieth week of Daniel.
What
is the identity of the "wilful king?" He is
the Antichrist of the
end time, the "man of sin" spoken of by
Paul, and the "beast out of
the sea" of John. Who is the King of the
North? He is the head of a
great power north of Israel which has wide
geographical range and of
world political stature, probably the USSR. Who is
the "attacker" in
11:40-45?
It is the King of the North and not the Antichrist.
The
commentary then dealt with the particulars of this passage
and demonstrated that they may be best understood
in the interpretive
framework established by the answers to the four
crucial questions.
Not
only does this view account for a smooth interpretation of the
passage itself, but it augments the argument of
the book of Daniel
and integrates it with other prophetic truth.
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
Grace
Theological Seminary
200
Seminary Dr.
Winona Lake, IN
46590
www.grace.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at:
thildebrandt@gordon.edu